Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » FERVE » FERMEL1780309591

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (FERMEL1780309591)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-79
Company Score Before Incident743 / 1000
Company Score After Incident664 / 1000
Company LinkView FERVE Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERFERMEL1780309591
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORThird-party compromise
DATA EXPOSEDNames, email addresses, phone numbers,...
INCIDENT DATE28/05/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of FERVE'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 FERVE 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 FERVE breach identified under incident ID FERMEL1780309591.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of FERVE's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ferve, the number of followers: 406, the industry type: Industrial Machinery Manufacturing and the number of employees: 13 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 743 and after the incident was 664 with a difference of -79 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 FERVE and their customers.

On 29 May 2024, Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF) disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF) Data Breach".

The Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF) confirmed a data breach linked to its third-party ticketing provider, Ferve, exposing the personal information of over 26,700 customers.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Third-party ticketing platform (Ferve), and exposing Names, email addresses, phone numbers, residential addresses, with nearly 26,700 records at risk.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Suspended access to affected accounts, and began remediation that includes Additional security measures implemented, and stakeholders are being briefed through Customer advisories sent (e.g., 'Critical Security Incident' emails).

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Emails and texts sent to affected customers (e.g., 'Critical Security Incident').

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 data breach linked to its third-party ticketing provider, Ferve and Compromise Software Supply Chain (T1195.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating third-party ticketing provider, Ferve, exposing the personal information. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access may have compromised customer data via Ferve platform. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating names, email addresses, phone numbers, and residential addresses compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data breach affecting 26,700 customers via third-party platform and Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unusual messages, including texts featuring sad face emojis and emails. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating suspended access to affected accounts as containment measure and Data Manipulation: Transmitted Data Manipulation (T1565.002) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating unusual messages...emails referencing Miley Cyrus sent to customers. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access may have compromised customer data via Ferve platform and Hide Artifacts: Hidden Files and Directories (T1564.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating investigation into the breach’s origin remains ongoing. 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%)
Compromise Software Supply Chain (80%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (60%)
Impact
Data Destruction (40%)
Data Manipulation: Transmitted Data Manipulation (50%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (70%)
Hide Artifacts: Hidden Files and Directories (50%)