Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » DragonForce » DRA1784283890

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (DRA1784283890)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-191
Company Score Before Incident544 / 1000
Company Score After Incident353 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERDRA1784283890
Type of Cyber IncidentRansomware
ATTACK VECTORAffiliate recruitment, Pre-packaged intrusion kit, Edge devices, Lightweight tunneling, SMB encryption
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE31/03/2026
STATUSPublished analysis

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of DragonForce's Ransomware 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 DragonForce 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 DragonForce breach identified under incident ID DRA1784283890.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of DragonForce's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/dragonforce, the number of followers: 186, the industry type: Musicians and the number of employees: 15 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 544 and after the incident was 353 with a difference of -191 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 DragonForce and their customers.

On 16 July 2024, a cybersecurity incident called "The Gentlemen Ransomware Gang Dominates Q2 2024 with Record Attacks" came to light.

A recent analysis by cybersecurity firm ReliaQuest reveals that The Gentlemen ransomware gang emerged as the most active threat group between April and June 2024, responsible for 300 incidents, surpassing long-standing leaders like Qilin.

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

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Published analysis, teams are taking away lessons such as The Gentlemen's rapid rise highlights the effectiveness of aggressive affiliate recruitment, pre-packaged intrusion kits, and AI-driven development in outpacing competitors. Established ransomware groups may need to adapt to maintain dominance, and recommending next steps like Enhance monitoring for affiliate-based ransomware operations, Implement AI-driven threat detection to counter evolving ransomware tactics and Strengthen defenses around edge devices and SMB encryption vulnerabilities.

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 Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating target selection (including edge devices) and Trusted Relationship (T1199) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including aggressive affiliate recruitment, and pre-packaged intrusion kit. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating pre-packaged intrusion kit covering attack workflows and Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating tools like lightweight tunneling and SMB encryption. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating lightweight tunneling for efficient deployment. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating sMB encryption for deployment. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating aI-driven build pipeline for malware updates and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating pre-packaged intrusion kit lowers barrier to entry. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating affiliate recruitment may involve credential abuse. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services: SMB/Windows Admin Shares (T1021.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating sMB encryption for efficient deployment. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including data encryption such as Yes, and ransomware strain such as The Gentlemen. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 1,368 victims across 99 countries. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Exploit Public-Facing Application (60%)
Trusted Relationship (80%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (70%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter (60%)
Persistence
External Remote Services (70%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (50%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (70%)
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (60%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Lateral Movement
Remote Services: SMB/Windows Admin Shares (80%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (90%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)

Sources & References