Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Hightower Advisors » AMEMEREDEHIGCET1775075723

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (AMEMEREDEHIGCET1775075723)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-70
Company Score Before Incident646 / 1000
Company Score After Incident576 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERAMEMEREDEHIGCET1775075723
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORUnauthorized Email Access, Ransomware
DATA EXPOSEDNames, Social Security numbers, Account...
INCIDENT DATE21/03/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Hightower Advisors'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 Hightower Advisors 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 Hightower Advisors breach identified under incident ID AMEMEREDEHIGCET1775075723.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Hightower Advisors's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/hightoweradvisors, the number of followers: 28750, the industry type: Financial Services and the number of employees: 629 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 646 and after the incident was 576 with a difference of -70 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 Hightower Advisors and their customers.

Cetera Financial recently reported "Financial Firms Face Class Action Lawsuits Over Data Breaches", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Cetera Financial and Ameriprise are facing class action lawsuits over alleged data breaches, with customers accusing both companies of failing to safeguard sensitive client information.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Email Account and Salesforce Records, and exposing Names, Social Security numbers and Account details.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Breach contained (Ameriprise), and stakeholders are being briefed through Failed to notify victims (Ameriprise).

Overall, the incident is a reminder of why proactive monitoring and strong governance matter.

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 Phishing: Spearphishing Link (T1566.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized actor accessed an employee’s email account and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating salesforce records compromised in ransomware attack. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack by ShinyHunters. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force: Password Guessing (T1110.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized actor accessed an employee’s email account and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating client data including names, Social Security numbers exposed. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 200GB of internal data compromised (Ameriprise) and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating salesforce records containing PII compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating 200GB of internal data (Ameriprise) and Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating data breach with long-term identity theft risk. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack by ShinyHunters and Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating salesforce records compromised. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating employee’s email account accessed by unauthorized actor and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating failed to notify victims (Ameriprise). These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing: Spearphishing Link (80%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (60%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (50%)
Credential Access
Brute Force: Password Guessing (70%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data from Information Repositories (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (60%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Defacement: Internal Defacement (40%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (70%)
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (50%)