Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » fanavagroup.co » FANIRI1774284457

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (FANIRI1774284457)

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 Incident753 / 1000
Company Score After Incident733 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERFANIRI1774284457
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORCompromised VSAT terminals via third-party provider (Fanava Group)
DATA EXPOSEDReal-time vessel positions, voice communications,...
INCIDENT DATE17/03/2025
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of fanavagroup.co'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 fanavagroup.co 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 fanavagroup.co breach identified under incident ID FANIRI1774284457.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of fanavagroup.co's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fanava-group, the number of followers: 1398, the industry type: Telecommunications and the number of employees: 71 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 753 and after the incident was 733 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 fanavagroup.co and their customers.

National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) recently reported "Coordinated Cyberattack on Iranian Maritime Fleet via Fanava Group Compromise", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

In March 2025, a coordinated cyberattack by the group Lab Dookhtegan disabled satellite communications for 116 Iranian state-owned vessels, including those operated by the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) and Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL).

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting VSAT terminals, AIS transponders, satellite communications, and exposing Real-time vessel positions, voice communications, data traffic.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as Commercial vessels operate as unintentional intelligence-gathering platforms due to weak cybersecurity oversight, fragmented accountability, and legacy systems. The maritime sector's cybersecurity gaps enable adversary intelligence collection by default, and recommending next steps like Monitor commercial vessels near defense installations, Strengthen supply chain security for VSAT providers and navigation systems and Integrate maritime cyber threats into threat assessments and exercises.

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 (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised Fanava Group, an Iranian satellite and IT provider and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating default credentials (e.g., admin/1234) granted entry to vessel satellite systems. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating root-level access to VSAT terminals across the fleet. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating default credentials used for persistent access to VSAT terminals. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating root-level access gained via default credentials. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating disabled Automatic Identification System (AIS) tracking and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating used default credentials to evade detection. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force: Password Guessing (T1110.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating default credentials (e.g., admin/1234) granted entry. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating access to real-time vessel positions, voice communications, and data traffic. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating real-time vessel positions, voice communications, and data traffic compromised and Automated Collection (T1119) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating vSAT traffic exposed voice calls, emails, and data transfers. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unencrypted VSAT traffic enabled interception. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data breach provided adversaries with real-time intelligence. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating severed ship-to-shore links and disabled AIS tracking. 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 (90%)
Valid Accounts (80%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (70%)
Persistence
Valid Accounts (80%)
Privilege Escalation
Valid Accounts (80%)
Defense Evasion
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (90%)
Valid Accounts (70%)
Credential Access
Brute Force: Password Guessing (80%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Automated Collection (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Impact
Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (80%)

Sources & References