Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum) » NOTETASOC1775515562

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (NOTETASOC1775515562)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-20
Company Score Before Incident749 / 1000
Company Score After Incident729 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERNOTETASOC1775515562
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDFull names, purchase histories, reservation...
INCIDENT DATE28/02/2026
STATUSOngoing (ANSSI and law enforcement)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum)'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 Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum) 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 Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum) breach identified under incident ID NOTETASOC1775515562.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum)'s information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/etablissement-public-du-musee-du-louvre, the number of followers: 1489, the industry type: Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos and the number of employees: 28 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 749 and after the incident was 729 with a difference of -20 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 Musée du Louvre (Louvre Museum) and their customers.

On 01 March 2024, Irec SAS (Vivaticket) disclosed Ransomware issues under the banner "Ransomware Attack Disrupts Online Reservations for Thousands of European Cultural Sites".

In early March, a ransomware attack targeting Irec SAS, the French subsidiary of online ticketing platform Vivaticket, disrupted online reservations for nearly 3,500 museums, monuments, and cultural sites across Europe.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Online ticketing services and organizational platforms, and exposing Full names, purchase histories, reservation details, email addresses, login timestamps, account metadata, countries of residence.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Customer notifications issued.

The case underscores how Ongoing (ANSSI and law enforcement), with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Customers notified of the breach.

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 targeting Irec SAS, the French subsidiary of online ticketing platform Vivaticket and External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating disrupted online reservations for nearly 3,500 museums, monuments, and cultural sites. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomHouse ransomware operation claimed responsibility. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Cloud Instance Metadata API (T1552.005) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating account metadata, login timestamps compromised. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating stolen data included full names, purchase histories, reservation details, email addresses and Data from Information Repositories: Confluence (T1213.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating online ticketing platform data compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating ransomHouse listed Irec on its leak site and asserted that stolen data was exfiltrated. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack disrupted online reservations and Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating some ticketing services and organizational platforms remain unavailable. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomHouse ransomware operation claimed responsibility for data exfiltration. 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%)
External Remote Services (70%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (50%)
Credential Access
Cloud Instance Metadata API (40%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Data from Information Repositories: Confluence (60%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Defacement: Internal Defacement (40%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (60%)

Sources & References