Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Huntress » HUNREDEXP1768977371

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (HUNREDEXP1768977371)

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 Incident747 / 1000
Company Score After Incident727 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERHUNREDEXP1768977371
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORWeaponized ZIP files with malicious JScript payloads
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE31/10/2025
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Huntress'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 Huntress 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 Huntress breach identified under incident ID HUNREDEXP1768977371.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Huntress's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/huntress-labs, the number of followers: 120630, the industry type: Computer and Network Security and the number of employees: 847 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 747 and after the incident was 727 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 Huntress and their customers.

On 01 November 2025, a cybersecurity incident called "Gootloader’s Sophisticated Anti-Detection Tactics Exposed in Latest Campaign" came to light.

A recent analysis by Huntress and Expel reveals how the Gootloader malware leverages deliberately malformed ZIP archives to evade security tools while maintaining functionality for targeted victims.

Impact assessments are still underway, so the full scope is not yet clear.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as Gootloader's use of malformed ZIP archives highlights the need for improved detection of non-standard archive structures and monitoring of script-based execution chains, and recommending next steps like Monitor for wscript.exe executing JScript from temp directories, Detect ZIP archives with >100 PK headers or truncated EOCD records and Inspect LNK files in Startup folders for persistence.

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 Attachment (T1566.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating weaponized ZIP files containing malicious JScript payloads and User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating victims extract and run the JScript file via Windows Script Host. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter: JavaScript (T1059.007) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating jScript payloads processed by WScript from AppData\Local\Temp, Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell (T1059.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating obfuscated PowerShell commands for C2 communications, and User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating victims run the extracted JScript file. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Shortcut Modification (T1547.009) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating lNK shortcuts in Startup folder referencing secondary scripts. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating malformed ZIP archives, XOR-encoded data blobs, obfuscated PowerShell, Obfuscated Files or Information: Binary Padding (T1027.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating zIP archives grow to 70-80 MB despite 287 KB payload, Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating indiana_Animal_Protection_Laws_Guide.js as lure, Process Injection (T1055) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating powerShell processes spawned for C2 (implied), and Deobfuscate/Decode Files or Information (T1140) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating xOR-encoded data blobs decoded by browsers. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating powerShell establishes C2 communications (implied) and Ingress Tool Transfer (T1105) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating multi-stage attack with secondary scripts (implied). Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating partnered with Vanilla Tempest deploying Rhysida ransomware. 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 Attachment (90%)
User Execution: Malicious File (90%)
Execution
Command and Scripting Interpreter: JavaScript (95%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell (90%)
User Execution: Malicious File (90%)
Persistence
Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Shortcut Modification (90%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (95%)
Obfuscated Files or Information: Binary Padding (80%)
Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (80%)
Process Injection (70%)
Deobfuscate/Decode Files or Information (90%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (80%)
Ingress Tool Transfer (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (80%)

Sources & References