Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (FOR1788424191)
The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.
Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis
Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis
- Timeline of Fortinet's Vulnerability 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 Fortinet 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 Fortinet breach identified under incident ID FOR1788424191.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Fortinet's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fortinet, the number of followers: 1310862, the industry type: Computer and Network Security and the number of employees: 16380 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 235 and after the incident was 233 with a difference of -2 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 Fortinet and their customers.
A newly reported cybersecurity incident, "The Gentlemen Ransomware Operation: Rapid Encryption and Expanding Threat", has drawn attention.
The Gentlemen ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operation, tracked as GOLD SHERWOOD, has emerged as a formidable cyber threat, capable of encrypting victim networks in under 24 hours after initial access.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Critical systems identified via network scanners and Backup systems (Veeam, SQL Writer, Backup Exec), and exposing Yes.
Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.
The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as Speed is critical: defenders may have less than 24 hours to respond. Exposed remote access (VPNs, Fortinet appliances) remains a primary entry point. Legitimate tools and directories (RDP, C:\PerfLogs) are exploited to evade detection. EDR-killing frameworks and backup sabotage are central to the group’s success, and recommending next steps like Patch exposed Fortinet infrastructure (e.g., CVE-2024-55591), Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) for VPN services and Monitor and restrict access to legitimate tools (RDP, net commands).
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 high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating cVE-2024-55591 (FortiOS/FortiProxy authentication bypass), External Remote Services (T1133) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including exposed Fortinet infrastructure, and brute-force attacks on FortiGate VPN services, and Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised VPN credentials (often due to lack of multi-factor authentication). Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell (T1059.003) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating legitimate Windows tools (*net* commands) to escalate privileges and Remote Services: Remote Desktop Protocol (T1021.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating legitimate Windows tools (RDP) to escalate privileges. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating cloudflared for persistent remote access. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Domain Accounts (T1078.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating credential dumping (Mimikatz, LSASS queries) for lateral movement and Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell (T1059.003) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating legitimate Windows tools (*net* commands) to escalate privileges. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating gentleKiller EDR-killing framework terminates 400+ security processes, Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating disable Microsoft Defender via PowerShell exclusions or registry changes, Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating staging attack utilities in *C such as \PerfLogs* (directory often overlooked), and Indicator Removal: Clear Windows Event Logs (T1070.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating defense evasion is a core focus of the attack playbook. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified OS Credential Dumping: LSASS Memory (T1003.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating credential dumping (Mimikatz, LSASS queries) for lateral movement and Brute Force: Password Guessing (T1110.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating brute-force attacks on FortiGate VPN services. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Network Service Discovery (T1046) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating network scanners (Advanced IP Scanner, SoftPerfect) to identify critical systems. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services: Remote Desktop Protocol (T1021.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating legitimate Windows tools (RDP) for lateral movement and Valid Accounts: Domain Accounts (T1078.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating credential dumping (Mimikatz, LSASS queries) for lateral movement. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data theft before encryption (double extortion model). Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Ingress Tool Transfer (T1105) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating cloudflared for persistent remote access. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration using Rclone, Restic, and MinIO Client. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (100%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware encryption within 24 hours of initial access and Inhibit System Recovery (T1490) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating sabotage backups (Veeam, SQL Writer, Backup Exec) before encryption. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- Fortinet Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/fortinet/incident/FOR1788424191
- Fortinet CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/fortinet
- Fortinet Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/for1788424191-fortinet-vulnerability-july-2025/
- Fortinet CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/fortinet/history
- Fortinet CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://gbhackers.com/rapid-ransomware-deployment/
- Rankiteo A.I CyberSecurity Rating methodology: https://www.rankiteo.com/Images/rankiteo_algo.pdf
- Rankiteo TPRM Scoring methodology: https://static.rankiteo.com/model/rankiteo_tprm_methodology.pdf