Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Imperial Beach Community Clinic » IMP1768956227

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (IMP1768956227)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-64
Company Score Before Incident761 / 1000
Company Score After Incident697 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERIMP1768956227
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORPhishing, Email Compromise
DATA EXPOSEDSensitive patient data including names,...
INCIDENT DATE14/04/2025
STATUSCompleted

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Imperial Beach Community Clinic'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 Imperial Beach Community Clinic 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 Imperial Beach Community Clinic breach identified under incident ID IMP1768956227.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Imperial Beach Community Clinic's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/imperial-beach-community-clinic, the number of followers: 594, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 55 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 761 and after the incident was 697 with a difference of -64 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 Imperial Beach Community Clinic and their customers.

On 15 April 2025, Imperial Beach Community Clinic disclosed Data Breach and Ransomware issues under the banner "Imperial Beach Community Clinic and Valley Eye Associates Cybersecurity Incidents".

Two healthcare providers, Imperial Beach Community Clinic (California) and Valley Eye Associates (Wisconsin), reported significant cybersecurity breaches, exposing sensitive patient data.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Email environment and Network, and exposing Sensitive patient data including names, dates of birth, insurance details, claim numbers, appointment and service dates, provider and procedure information.

In response, and began remediation that includes Strengthened data privacy and security policies and Additional security measures for email systems.

The case underscores how Completed, teams are taking away lessons such as Persistent vulnerabilities in healthcare cybersecurity, particularly phishing attacks and ransomware. Importance of ongoing security awareness training, strict access controls, timely breach notifications, and regular policy reviews, and recommending next steps like Ongoing security awareness training for staff, Strict access controls including unique login credentials and Timely breach notifications to affected individuals.

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 (T1566) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including unusual activity in its email environment, and email systems, which were likely the initial attack vector and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized individual had accessed certain email accounts. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating phishing attacks and ransomware. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized individual had accessed certain email accounts (implied weak credentials) and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating email compromise (potential credential harvesting). Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating attackers accessed its network for less than 48 hours (implied reconnaissance) and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating 139 GB of data exfiltrated (implied data discovery). Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exposing sensitive patient data including names, dates of birth, insurance details and Email Collection (T1114) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized individual had accessed certain email accounts. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including 139 GB of data exfiltrated, and qilin ransomware group...published the stolen data. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack (implied encryption). Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access via email accounts (blending in with legitimate activity) and Hide Artifacts (T1564) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating attackers accessed its network for less than 48 hours (implied stealth). These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing (90%)
Valid Accounts (80%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (70%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Discovery
Account Discovery (70%)
File and Directory Discovery (80%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Email Collection (90%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (80%)
Hide Artifacts (60%)

Sources & References