Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Databarracks » DAT1784637028

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (DAT1784637028)

The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-17
Company Score Before Incident751 / 1000
Company Score After Incident734 / 1000
Company LinkView Databarracks Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERDAT1784637028
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORThird-Party Supplier Compromise
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE30/06/2025
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Databarracks's Cyber Attack and lateral movement inside company's environment.
  • Overview of affected data sets, including SSNs and PHI, and why they materially increase incident severity.
  • How Rankiteo’s incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score.
  • How this cyber incident impacts Databarracks Rankiteo cyber scoring and cyber rating.
  • Rankiteo’s MITRE ATT&CK correlation analysis for this incident, with associated confidence level.

Full Incident Analysis Transcript

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the Databarracks breach identified under incident ID DAT1784637028.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Databarracks's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/databarracks, the number of followers: 5691, the industry type: IT Services and IT Consulting and the number of employees: 165 employees

After the initial compromise, the video explains how Rankiteo's incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score. The incident score before the incident was 751 and after the incident was 734 with a difference of -17 which is could be a good indicator of the severity and impact of the incident.

In the next step of the video, we will analyze in more details the incident and the impact it had on Databarracks and their customers.

A newly reported cybersecurity incident, "UK Businesses Struggle with Supply Chain Cyber Risks", has drawn attention.

A recent report from Databarracks reveals that 26% of UK businesses experienced a cyber incident originating in their supply chain over the past year, despite nearly half (48%) admitting they continued working with suppliers despite known security or resilience concerns.

Impact assessments are still underway, so the full scope is not yet clear.

In response, while recovery efforts such as 59% of ransomware victims recovered via backups continue.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as Traditional 'tick-box' compliance assessments are insufficient; direct ownership of supplier risks and collaborative resilience planning are needed, especially with smaller or less mature suppliers, and recommending next steps like Integrate IT and business resilience, Improve supplier resilience assessments beyond onboarding and Avoid working with high-risk suppliers when alternatives exist.

Finally, we try to match the incident with the MITRE ATT&CK framework to see if there is any correlation between the incident and the MITRE ATT&CK framework.

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is a knowledge base of techniques and sub-techniques that are used to describe the tactics and procedures of cyber adversaries. It is a powerful tool for understanding the threat landscape and for developing effective defense strategies.

MITRE ATT&CK® Correlation Analysis

Rankiteo's analysis has identified several MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques associated with this incident, each with varying levels of confidence based on available evidence. Under the Initial Access tactic, the analysis identified Supply Chain Compromise (T1195) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating 26% of UK businesses experienced a cyber incident originating in their supply chain and Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (T1195.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating attack vector such as Third-Party Supplier Compromise. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 48% continued working with suppliers despite known security concerns. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation of Remote Services (T1210) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating cascade effects from supplier disruptions can be severe. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Resource Hijacking (T1496) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating leading cause of IT downtime for the fourth consecutive year and Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating cascade effects from supplier disruptions. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Disabling Security Tools (T1089) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating traditional tick-box compliance assessments are insufficient. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Supply Chain Compromise (95%)
Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (80%)
Persistence
Valid Accounts (70%)
Lateral Movement
Exploitation of Remote Services (70%)
Impact
Resource Hijacking (60%)
Endpoint Denial of Service (60%)
Defense Evasion
Disabling Security Tools (50%)

Sources & References