Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Dromos Labs » DRO2295022112225

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (DRO2295022112225)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-18
Company Score Before Incident752 / 1000
Company Score After Incident734 / 1000
Company LinkView Dromos Labs Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERDRO2295022112225
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORDNS Spoofing/Hijacking, Malicious Signature Requests, Unlimited Approval Prompts
DATA EXPOSEDWallet Connection Data (via Signature...
INCIDENT DATE21/11/2025
STATUSOngoing (as of 2025-11-22)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Dromos Labs'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 Dromos Labs 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 Dromos Labs breach identified under incident ID DRO2295022112225.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Dromos Labs's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/dromoslabs, the number of followers: 96, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 10 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 752 and after the incident was 734 with a difference of -18 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 Dromos Labs and their customers.

On 22 November 2025, Aerodrome Finance disclosed DNS Hijacking, Phishing and Frontend Compromise issues under the banner "Base’s Top DEX Aerodrome Hit by a Suspected Frontend Security Breach via DNS Hijacking".

Aerodrome Finance, the leading decentralized exchange (DEX) on the Base network, confirmed a DNS hijacking attack that compromised its centralized domains (.finance and .box).

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Centralized Domains (.finance, .box) and Frontend Interface, and exposing Wallet Connection Data (via Signature Requests) and Transaction Approval Metadata.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Shutdown of Compromised Domains (.finance, .box) and Redirection to Decentralized Mirrors (aero.drome.eth.limo, aero.drome.eth.link), and began remediation that includes DNS Provider Investigation and Public Warnings via Social Media, and stakeholders are being briefed through Real-Time Twitter Updates, Clear Instructions to Avoid Compromised Domains and Transparency About Smart Contract Security.

The case underscores how Ongoing (as of 2025-11-22), teams are taking away lessons such as DNS Infrastructure as a Critical Attack Vector in DeFi, Need for Decentralized Frontend Redundancy (e.g., ENS Mirrors) and User Education on Malicious Signature Requests, and recommending next steps like Adopt Multi-Layered DNS Security (e.g., DNSSEC, Decentralized Alternatives), Implement Frontend Transaction Simulators to Warn Users of Suspicious Approvals and Regular Audits of Domain Registrars/Providers, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Avoid Compromised Domains, Use ENS Mirrors and Monitor Wallet Approvals.

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 Data Manipulation: DNS Cache Poisoning (T1565.001) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including dNS hijacking attack targeting its centralized domains (.finance and .box), and vulnerabilities in Box Domains’ infrastructure. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Token Manipulation: Web Session Cookie Manipulation (T1659) with moderate to high confidence (85%), with evidence including malicious signature requests designed to drain wallets via unlimited approval prompts, and wallet Signatures and Transaction Approval Data compromised. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information: Software Packing (T1027.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating deceptive interfaces and harmless-looking message (e.g., the number 1) masking drain transactions and Indicator Removal: File Deletion (T1070.004) with moderate to high confidence (75%), supported by evidence indicating shutdown of Compromised Domains (attacker likely cleared logs/traces post-exploitation). Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Data Transfer Size Limits (T1030) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including unlimited approval prompts enabling ETH/USDC/WETH/NFT transfers, and potential (via Malicious Approvals) exfiltration. Under the Social Engineering tactic, the analysis identified Phishing: Spearphishing Link (T1566.002) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including sophisticated phishing attempts via malicious signature requests, and deceptive interfaces tricking users into signing transactions. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Resource Hijacking (T1496) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including risked wallet drains for users who approved transactions, and losing their entire wallet balances. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Sources & References