Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) » FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-84
Company Score Before Incident229 / 1000
Company Score After Incident145 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERFBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORPhishing, Social Engineering, Exploiting Exposed Operational Technology
DATA EXPOSEDGovernment data, corporate data, personally...
INCIDENT DATE31/01/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)'s Breach 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 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 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 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) breach identified under incident ID FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)'s information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fbi, the number of followers: 963487, the industry type: Law Enforcement and the number of employees: 10425 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 229 and after the incident was 145 with a difference of -84 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 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their customers.

U.S. government offices recently reported "Operation Economic Outcast: U.S. Treasury Sanctions Iranian Cyber Actors", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

The U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Energy companies, Defense contractors and Healthcare institutions, and exposing Government data, corporate data, personally identifiable information, plus an estimated financial loss of $17 million (cryptocurrency theft).

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering U.S. Treasury sanctions, Rewards for Justice program ($10 million for information on cyber threats).

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 to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting exposed operational technology, Phishing (T1566) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating phishing listed as attack vector, and Drive-by Compromise (T1189) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating social engineering and exposed OT imply drive-by risks. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating social engineering attacks require user interaction and Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating oT exploitation likely involves scripting. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating state-sponsored actors likely use compromised accounts and Server Software Component (T1505) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating oT systems may have backdoors installed. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating oT exploitation implies privilege escalation and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating compromised accounts used for escalation. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Masquerading (T1036) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating iRGC front companies (Zedcex, Zedxion) used for evasion and Impair Defenses (T1562) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating disruptions to critical infrastructure imply defense impairment. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating state-sponsored actors likely use brute force and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating oT systems may store credentials locally. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration implies discovery phase and Network Service Scanning (T1046) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exposed OT systems require scanning. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating government data, corporate data, PII compromised and Automated Collection (T1119) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating large-scale data exfiltration implies automation. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating state-sponsored actors use C2 channels and Proxy (T1090) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating iRGC front companies may proxy traffic. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from government offices in 2024 and Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating cryptocurrency theft implies alternative exfiltration. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware listed as attack type, Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating four-day shutdown of U.K. power plant, and Data Manipulation (T1565) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating disruptions to water/wastewater utilities imply manipulation. 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 (70%)
Phishing (80%)
Drive-by Compromise (50%)
Execution
User Execution (60%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter (70%)
Persistence
Valid Accounts (60%)
Server Software Component (50%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (70%)
Valid Accounts (60%)
Defense Evasion
Masquerading (70%)
Impair Defenses (60%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (70%)
Network Service Scanning (80%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Automated Collection (70%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (80%)
Proxy (60%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Endpoint Denial of Service (80%)
Data Manipulation (60%)

Sources & References