Hyundai AutoEver America Breach Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (HYU1002210111125)

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the Hyundai AutoEver America breach identified under incident ID HYU1002210111125.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Hyundai AutoEver America's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/hyundai-autoever-america, the number of followers: 75117, the industry type: IT Services and IT Consulting and the number of employees: 663 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 757 and after the incident was 667 with a difference of -90 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 Hyundai AutoEver America and their customers.

On 31 October 2025, Hyundai Motor Group disclosed Data Breach and Unauthorized Access issues under the banner "Hyundai Motor Group Data Breach Affecting 2.7 Million Customers".

A massive data breach at Hyundai AutoEver America (HAEA), the IT division of Hyundai Motor Group, compromised the personal data of up to 2.7 million customers, including those of Kia and Genesis.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Hyundai AutoEver America (HAEA) network, and exposing Names, Addresses and Phone Numbers, with nearly 2,700,000 records at risk.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Blocked access to the company’s network (as of March 2025), and began remediation that includes Added extra security to its network, and stakeholders are being briefed through Delayed customer notifications (sent in late October 2025) and Offered 2 years of free identity theft and credit monitoring via Epiq.

The case underscores how Ongoing (forensic experts and law enforcement involved), teams are taking away lessons such as Previous breaches in Europe (2023, 2024) failed to prevent this incident, indicating inadequate implementation of corrective measures. Delayed disclosure raises questions about transparency and incident response effectiveness, and recommending next steps like Improve incident detection and response times to minimize delay in customer notifications, Enhance data protection measures, particularly for sensitive PII like SSNs and driver’s licenses and Conduct regular third-party audits to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities proactively, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Notification letters sent in late October 2025 and Offer of 2 years of free identity theft and credit monitoring via Epiq.

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.

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 Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating blocked access to the company’s network implies prior unauthorized access via compromised credentials and External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access to HAEA network between Feb 22–Mar 2, 2025 (no specific vector, but remote access likely). Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating high-value PII (SSNs, DLs) exposed; often tied to credential theft for further exploitation. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating compromised PII such as names, SSNs, driver’s licenses, addresses, phone numbers from HAEA databases. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration such as Yes with 2.7M records stolen; no specifics on protocol, but exfil occurred. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Phishing for Information (T1598) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating stolen data enables targeted phishing attacks and cross-referencing with other leaked databases and Identity Theft (T1659) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating high identity theft risk due to exposure of SSNs and driver’s licenses. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Indicator Removal: File Deletion (T1070.004) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating delayed detection (Feb–Mar 2025) suggests possible log/trace cleanup, though not explicitly confirmed. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.