Internet Archive
Company Details
Linkedin ID:
internet-archive
Website:
Employees number:
264
Number of followers:
47,860
NAICS:
51912
Industry Type:
Homepage:
archive.org
IP Addresses:
42
Company ID:
INT_7975925
Scan Status:
Completed
Internet Archive Company CyberSecurity Posture
archive.org
The Internet Archive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, is a digital library of Internet sites and other cultural artifacts in digital form. Like a paper library, we provide free access to researchers, historians, scholars, people with print disabilities, and the general public. We serve millions of people each day and are one of the top 300 web sites in the world. We are funded through donations, grants, and by providing web archiving and book digitization services for our partners. Our mission is to provide Universal Access to All Knowledge. We began in 1996 by archiving the Internet itself, a medium that was just beginning to grow in use. Today our archive contains: 735 billion web pages 41 million books and texts 14.7 million audio recordings (including 240,000 live concerts) 8.4 million videos (including 2.4 million Television News programs) 4.4 million images 890,000 software programs You can find information about our projects on our blog at https://blog.archive.org/
Internet Archive A.I CyberSecurity Scoring
Internet Archive Risk Score (AI oriented)Between 0 and 549
Internet Archive
Updated:
- Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
- Insurance preferes TPRM score to calculate premium
Internet Archive Global Score (TPRM)XXXX
Internet Archive
- Instant access to detailed risk factors
- Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
- Vulnerabilities
- Findings
Internet Archive Company CyberSecurity News & History
Past Incidents
4
Attack Types
2
Internet Archive
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack with significant impact with customers data leaks
Description: In October 2024, the **Internet Archive** suffered a major security breach alongside disruptive DDoS attacks, exposing data from **31 million user accounts**, including email addresses, usernames, bcrypt-hashed passwords, and internal records. The attack exploited **unrotated API tokens in a Zendesk support system**, revealing critical gaps in token management and security monitoring. While no highly sensitive financial data was stolen, the breach compromised a vast amount of user credentials and internal documentation, leading to potential downstream risks like credential stuffing, phishing, and reputational harm. The incident underscored the dangers of poor API security practices and the cascading effects of third-party vulnerabilities in SaaS ecosystems.
The Internet Archive
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack threatening the organization’s existence
Description: The Internet Archive faced a multifaceted cyberattack resulting in the theft of 31 million user account details and website defacement, as well as sustained DDoS attacks causing continued inaccessibility of the site. Additionally, the organization is contending with lawsuits which threaten its existence. The breach exposes user information and the continued attacks undermine confidence in the Internet Archive's ability to safeguard data, posing threats to its operational continuity.
Internet Archive
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack threatening the organization’s existence
Description: The Internet Archive endured a significant data breach followed by website defacement and persistent DDoS attacks. Malicious actors compromised 31 million unique email addresses, usernames, bcrypt password hashes, and system data as confirmed by security researcher Troy Hunt. The breach, initially concealed and later publicized via an illicit JavaScript pop-up, and ongoing attacks, have led to service interruptions and exposed the organization to cybersecurity and legal risks.
Internet Archive
Cyber Attack
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack threatening the organization’s existence
Description: Since May 2025, the **Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine** has experienced a **critical 87% drop** in archiving news websites, reducing snapshots from **1.2 million (Jan–May 2025) to just 148,628 (May–Oct 2025)**. This severe decline threatens the **historical integrity of digital archives**, particularly for news domains, raising concerns about **permanent data loss** of public records. The issue stems from **operational failures** (e.g., indexing delays, resource misallocation) compounded by **financial strain**—the nonprofit spent **$32.7M in 2023** but earned only **$23M**, diverting funds to legal battles (e.g., lawsuits from publishers like **Hachette, Penguin Random House** over digital lending and music labels for the **Great 78 Project**). Prior disruptions include a **massive data breach (Oct 2024)**, forcing weeks-long downtime and a subsequent cyberattack. The **legal pressure and funding shortages** directly hinder core archiving capabilities, risking **irreversible gaps** in global web history preservation.
Internet Archive Company Scoring based on AI Models
Cyber Incidents Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
A.I Risk Score Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
Underwriter Stats for Internet Archive
Incidents vs Libraries Industry Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Internet Archive in 2025.
Incidents vs All-Companies Average (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Internet Archive in 2025.
Incident Types Internet Archive vs Libraries Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Internet Archive in 2025.
Incident History — Internet Archive (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Internet Archive cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Internet Archive Company Subsidiaries
The Internet Archive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, is a digital library of Internet sites and other cultural artifacts in digital form. Like a paper library, we provide free access to researchers, historians, scholars, people with print disabilities, and the general public. We serve millions of people each day and are one of the top 300 web sites in the world. We are funded through donations, grants, and by providing web archiving and book digitization services for our partners. Our mission is to provide Universal Access to All Knowledge. We began in 1996 by archiving the Internet itself, a medium that was just beginning to grow in use. Today our archive contains: 735 billion web pages 41 million books and texts 14.7 million audio recordings (including 240,000 live concerts) 8.4 million videos (including 2.4 million Television News programs) 4.4 million images 890,000 software programs You can find information about our projects on our blog at https://blog.archive.org/
Loading...
Internet Archive Similar Companies
Providence Public Library (PPL) is a 146-year-old nonprofit corporation providing free public library services through its rich and historic physical and digital collections, extensive information resources, thought-provoking exhibitions, impactful educational programs, and expert staff. PPL is cont
Tulane University Libraries
Tulane University Libraries consist of four physical locations across two campuses in one of the most vibrant and diverse cities in North America. The Libraries serve Tulane’s nine schools and one undergraduate college with over 4.6 million books and physical items; 1.2 million eBooks; nearly 200,00
High Plains Library District
We're a library district located in Northern Colorado, providing the sorts of library services you'd expect plus a whole lot more! Between our 7 Branch locations, 9 Member locations, and one of the most robust Outreach departments in the country, we serve multiple diverse communities with a wide var
Hackley Public Library
The Hackley Public Library is dedicated to 1) promoting knowledge, understanding, and wisdom, 2) combating ignorance, intolerance, and indifference, 3) promoting the free exchange of ideas, and 4) conserving our national and local cultural heritage. The mission of the Hackley Public Library is to
Potsdam Public Library
The Potsdam Public Library is central to the intellectual life of our community. It provides the tools, resources, and techniques for literacy, lifelong learning, recreation, and research. Our library is a leveling influence on the digital divide, providing high-speed internet access, digital litera
Jefferson County Public Library
Jefferson County Public Library servers more than 550,000 residents from ten different locations: Arvada, Belmar, Columbine, Conifer, Edgewater, Evergreen, Golden, Lakewood, Standley Lake and Wheat Ridge. Our Mission To enrich the quality of life for all people in Jefferson County by providing re
.png)
Internet Archive CyberSecurity News
November 08, 2025 08:00 AM
FBI Wants to Know Who Runs Archive.ph
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has launched a probe to find the person or group behind the widely used archiving website...
September 03, 2025 07:00 AM
Keep Donors Safe: 8 Cybersecurity Steps Every Nonprofit Should Know
Learn 8 simple steps to protect donor data, build trust, and keep your nonprofit safe from phishing, ransomware, and breaches.
August 24, 2025 07:00 AM
Malicious Go Module Poses as SSH Brute-Force Tool, Steals Credentials via Telegram Bot
Cybersecurity researchers have discovered a malicious Go module that presents itself as a brute-force tool for SSH but actually contains...
July 28, 2025 07:00 AM
Secure Cyberspace and Critical Infrastructure
Increased connectivity of people and devices to the Internet and to each other has created an ever-expanding attack surface that extends...
July 08, 2025 10:24 AM
What Z library alternatives are out there?
Looking for Z library alternatives? Here are some of our top picks for accessing ebooks online and for free.
June 28, 2025 07:00 AM
FBI, cybersecurity firms say a prolific hacking crew is now targeting airlines and the transportation sector
The fresh wave of attacks targeting airlines comes soon after the hackers hit the U.K. retail sector and the insurance industry.
June 20, 2025 07:00 AM
Iran’s government says it shut down internet to protect against cyberattacks
The government cited the recent hacks on Bank Sepah and cryptocurrency exchange Nobitex as reasons to shut down internet access to virtually...
May 06, 2025 07:00 AM
Administration’s altered Signal chats pose new cyber risks, experts say
The system adopted by President Donald Trump's administration to archive messages on the Signal app in the wake of the debacle over the Houthi strikes chat...
April 18, 2025 07:00 AM
2025’s Top OSINT Tools: A Fresh Take on Open-Source Intel
Check out the top OSINT tools of 2025, an updated list featuring the best free and paid open-source intelligence tools for cybersecurity and investigations.
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore insights on cybersecurity incidents, risk posture, and Rankiteo's assessments.
Internet Archive CyberSecurity History Information
Official Website of Internet Archive
The official website of Internet Archive is http://www.archive.org.
Internet Archive’s AI-Generated Cybersecurity Score
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive’s AI-generated cybersecurity score is 496, reflecting their Critical security posture.
How many security badges does Internet Archive’ have ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive currently holds 0 security badges, indicating that no recognized compliance certifications are currently verified for the organization.
Does Internet Archive have SOC 2 Type 1 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive is not certified under SOC 2 Type 1.
Does Internet Archive have SOC 2 Type 2 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive does not hold a SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Does Internet Archive comply with GDPR ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive is not listed as GDPR compliant.
Does Internet Archive have PCI DSS certification ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive does not currently maintain PCI DSS compliance.
Does Internet Archive comply with HIPAA ?
According to Rankiteo, Internet Archive is not compliant with HIPAA regulations.
Does Internet Archive have ISO 27001 certification ?
According to Rankiteo,Internet Archive is not certified under ISO 27001, indicating the absence of a formally recognized information security management framework.
Industry Classification of Internet Archive
Internet Archive operates primarily in the Libraries industry.
Number of Employees at Internet Archive
Internet Archive employs approximately 264 people worldwide.
Subsidiaries Owned by Internet Archive
Internet Archive presently has no subsidiaries across any sectors.
Internet Archive’s LinkedIn Followers
Internet Archive’s official LinkedIn profile has approximately 47,860 followers.
NAICS Classification of Internet Archive
Internet Archive is classified under the NAICS code 51912, which corresponds to Libraries and Archives.
Internet Archive’s Presence on Crunchbase
No, Internet Archive does not have a profile on Crunchbase.
Internet Archive’s Presence on LinkedIn
Yes, Internet Archive maintains an official LinkedIn profile, which is actively utilized for branding and talent engagement, which can be accessed here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/internet-archive.
Cybersecurity Incidents Involving Internet Archive
As of November 28, 2025, Rankiteo reports that Internet Archive has experienced 4 cybersecurity incidents.
Number of Peer and Competitor Companies
Internet Archive has an estimated 1,268 peer or competitor companies worldwide.
What types of cybersecurity incidents have occurred at Internet Archive ?
Incident Types: The types of cybersecurity incidents that have occurred include Breach and Cyber Attack.
How does Internet Archive detect and respond to cybersecurity incidents ?
Detection and Response: The company detects and responds to cybersecurity incidents through an incident response plan activated with likely (both organizations disclosed breaches publicly), and containment measures with token rotation (internet archive, post-breach), containment measures with phishing awareness training (google, implied), and remediation measures with secure token storage/encryption (internet archive), remediation measures with monitoring enhancements (both), and communication strategy with public disclosure (both incidents), and enhanced monitoring with recommended (post-breach), and incident response plan activated with yes (for 2024 breach; unclear for 2025 archiving decline), and containment measures with restoration of services after 2024 breach, containment measures with planned addition of missing snapshots (per mark graham), and recovery measures with site restoration after weeks (post-2024 breach), recovery measures with unspecified fixes for indexation issues, and communication strategy with statements to nieman lab/mashable, communication strategy with no official link between archiving decline and legal pressures..
Incident Details
Can you provide details on each incident ?
Title: Internet Archive Data Breach and DDoS Attacks
Description: The Internet Archive endured a significant data breach followed by website defacement and persistent DDoS attacks. Malicious actors compromised 31 million unique email addresses, usernames, bcrypt password hashes, and system data as confirmed by security researcher Troy Hunt. The breach, initially concealed and later publicized via an illicit JavaScript pop-up, and ongoing attacks, have led to service interruptions and exposed the organization to cybersecurity and legal risks.
Type: data breach
Attack Vector: malicious actors
Title: Internet Archive Cyber Attack
Description: The Internet Archive faced a multifaceted cyberattack resulting in the theft of 31 million user account details and website defacement, as well as sustained DDoS attacks causing continued inaccessibility of the site. Additionally, the organization is contending with lawsuits which threaten its existence.
Type: Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Data TheftWebsite DefacementDDoS Attacks
Title: Google Salesforce Breach (2025) and Internet Archive Data Breach (2024)
Description: Two notable SaaS breaches: (1) Google reported a breach of its Salesforce database by ShinyHunters (UNC6040) in August 2025, exposing customer contact details via voice phishing. (2) The Internet Archive disclosed a major breach in October 2024, exposing 31M user accounts (emails, usernames, hashed passwords) due to unrotated API tokens in Zendesk. Both incidents highlight SaaS vulnerabilities like phishing, token mismanagement, and insufficient monitoring.
Date Publicly Disclosed: 2025-08-012024-10-01
Type: Data Breach
Attack Vector: Voice Phishing (Vishing)Credential TheftUnrotated API TokensOAuth Abuse (Potential)
Vulnerability Exploited: Human Error (Phishing Susceptibility)Improper Token Management (Unrotated API Tokens)Lack of Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) Enforcement
Threat Actor: ShinyHunters (UNC6040)Unknown (Internet Archive Breach)
Motivation: Data Theft (Customer Contact Details)Potential Financial Gain (Dark Web Data Sales)Disruption (DDoS in Internet Archive Case)
Title: Déclin significatif de l'archivage des pages web par l'Internet Archive (Wayback Machine)
Description: Depuis mai 2025, la Wayback Machine de l'Internet Archive a enregistré une baisse de 87 % des instantanés archivés pour 100 grands sites d'actualité, passant de 1,2 million (1er janvier - 15 mai 2025) à 148 628 (17 mai - 1er octobre 2025). Ce déclin coïncide avec des problèmes techniques (dysfonctionnements d'indexation, allocation de ressources) et une pression juridique accrue liée à des litiges avec des éditeurs (Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House) et des labels discographiques (projet 'Great 78'). L'organisation, déjà en déficit financier (32,7M$ de dépenses vs 23M$ de revenus en 2023), a également subi une fuite de données massive en octobre 2024, entraînant des interruptions prolongées de service.
Date Detected: 2025-05-17
Date Publicly Disclosed: 2025-10-01
Type: Service Degradation
What are the most common types of attacks the company has faced ?
Common Attack Types: The most common types of attacks the company has faced is Breach.
How does the company identify the attack vectors used in incidents ?
Identification of Attack Vectors: The company identifies the attack vectors used in incidents through Voice Phishing (Google Salesforce)Unrotated API Tokens (Internet Archive).
Impact of the Incidents
What was the impact of each incident ?
Incident : data breach INT000101124
Data Compromised: Email addresses, Usernames, Bcrypt password hashes, System data
Operational Impact: service interruptions
Incident : Cyber Attack INT000101524
Data Compromised: User account details
Systems Affected: Website
Downtime: Continued inaccessibility
Operational Impact: Operational continuity threatened
Brand Reputation Impact: Undermines confidence in data safeguarding
Legal Liabilities: Lawsuits threatening existence
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Data Compromised: 31m user accounts (internet archive: emails, usernames, bcrypt-hashed passwords, internal records), Google salesforce: customer contact details and notes (smb customers)
Systems Affected: Salesforce Database (Google)Zendesk Support System (Internet Archive)
Downtime: Internet Archive: Disruptive DDoS attacks alongside breach (duration unspecified)
Operational Impact: Lost Productivity (Both Incidents)Investigation and Remediation Efforts
Customer Complaints: Likely (trust erosion, but no specific numbers provided)
Brand Reputation Impact: Erosion of Customer Trust (Both Incidents)Potential Customer Churn (MSPs/Clients Questioning Reliability)
Identity Theft Risk: Low (Internet Archive: hashed passwords; Google: no financial/PII exposed)
Payment Information Risk: None (No financial data compromised in either breach)
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Data Compromised: Historical web snapshots (news sites), Potential user data (from 2024 breach)
Systems Affected: Wayback MachineInternet Archive main website
Downtime: ['Weeks (after October 2024 breach)', 'Partial degradation since May 2025']
Operational Impact: 87% reduction in archived snapshots for news sites; delayed indexation of 5+ months
Brand Reputation Impact: High (concerns over historical record completeness and reliability)
Legal Liabilities: Ongoing lawsuits from publishers (Controlled Digital Lending)Lawsuits from record labels (Great 78 Project)Potential regulatory scrutiny
What types of data are most commonly compromised in incidents ?
Commonly Compromised Data Types: The types of data most commonly compromised in incidents are Email Addresses, Usernames, Bcrypt Password Hashes, System Data, , User account details, Contact Details (Google Salesforce), User Account Data (Internet Archive: Emails, Usernames, Hashed Passwords), , Historical Web Snapshots (News Sites), Potentially User Data (2024 Incident) and .
Which entities were affected by each incident ?
Incident : data breach INT000101124
Entity Name: Internet Archive
Entity Type: Organization
Industry: Non-profit digital library
Incident : Cyber Attack INT000101524
Entity Name: Internet Archive
Entity Type: Non-profit organization
Industry: Digital library
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Entity Name: Google (Salesforce Database)
Entity Type: Technology Corporation
Industry: Cloud Computing / SaaS
Location: Global
Size: Large Enterprise
Customers Affected: SMB customers (scope unspecified)
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Entity Name: Internet Archive
Entity Type: Non-Profit Digital Library
Industry: Education / Digital Preservation
Location: Global (HQ: San Francisco, USA)
Size: Medium-Large Organization
Customers Affected: 31 million user accounts
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Entity Name: Internet Archive
Entity Type: Non-profit organization
Industry: Digital Library/Archiving
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Customers Affected: Global users of Wayback Machine (researchers, journalists, general public)
Response to the Incidents
What measures were taken in response to each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Incident Response Plan Activated: Likely (both organizations disclosed breaches publicly)
Containment Measures: Token Rotation (Internet Archive, post-breach)Phishing Awareness Training (Google, implied)
Remediation Measures: Secure Token Storage/Encryption (Internet Archive)Monitoring Enhancements (Both)
Communication Strategy: Public Disclosure (Both Incidents)
Enhanced Monitoring: Recommended (Post-Breach)
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Incident Response Plan Activated: Yes (for 2024 breach; unclear for 2025 archiving decline)
Containment Measures: Restoration of services after 2024 breachPlanned addition of missing snapshots (per Mark Graham)
Recovery Measures: Site restoration after weeks (post-2024 breach)Unspecified fixes for indexation issues
Communication Strategy: Statements to Nieman Lab/MashableNo official link between archiving decline and legal pressures
What is the company's incident response plan?
Incident Response Plan: The company's incident response plan is described as Likely (both organizations disclosed breaches publicly), Yes (for 2024 breach; unclear for 2025 archiving decline).
Data Breach Information
What type of data was compromised in each breach ?
Incident : data breach INT000101124
Type of Data Compromised: Email addresses, Usernames, Bcrypt password hashes, System data
Number of Records Exposed: 31 million
Incident : Cyber Attack INT000101524
Type of Data Compromised: User account details
Number of Records Exposed: 31000000
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Type of Data Compromised: Contact details (google salesforce), User account data (internet archive: emails, usernames, hashed passwords)
Number of Records Exposed: Unspecified (Google Salesforce), 31 million (Internet Archive)
Sensitivity of Data: Moderate (No highly sensitive PII/financial data in either case)
Data Exfiltration: Yes (Both Incidents)
Data Encryption: Partial (Internet Archive: bcrypt-hashed passwords)
Personally Identifiable Information: Limited (Emails, usernames; no SSNs/financial data)
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Type of Data Compromised: Historical web snapshots (news sites), Potentially user data (2024 incident)
Sensitivity of Data: Moderate to High (historical records; potential PII in 2024 breach)
Data Exfiltration: Unconfirmed (for 2025); confirmed in October 2024 breach
File Types Exposed: Web page snapshotsPotentially databases (2024)
Personally Identifiable Information: Possible (2024 breach)
What measures does the company take to prevent data exfiltration ?
Prevention of Data Exfiltration: The company takes the following measures to prevent data exfiltration: Secure Token Storage/Encryption (Internet Archive), Monitoring Enhancements (Both), .
How does the company handle incidents involving personally identifiable information (PII) ?
Handling of PII Incidents: The company handles incidents involving personally identifiable information (PII) through by token rotation (internet archive, post-breach), phishing awareness training (google, implied), , restoration of services after 2024 breach, planned addition of missing snapshots (per mark graham) and .
Ransomware Information
How does the company recover data encrypted by ransomware ?
Data Recovery from Ransomware: The company recovers data encrypted by ransomware through Site restoration after weeks (post-2024 breach), Unspecified fixes for indexation issues, .
Regulatory Compliance
Were there any regulatory violations and fines imposed for each incident ?
Incident : Cyber Attack INT000101524
Legal Actions: Lawsuits
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Regulatory Notifications: Likely (GDPR/CCPA if applicable, but not specified)
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Legal Actions: Lawsuits from publishers (Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House), Lawsuits from record labels (Great 78 Project),
How does the company ensure compliance with regulatory requirements ?
Ensuring Regulatory Compliance: The company ensures compliance with regulatory requirements through Lawsuits, Lawsuits from publishers (Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House), Lawsuits from record labels (Great 78 Project), .
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What lessons were learned from each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Lessons Learned: SaaS threats are evolving with AI-powered phishing and token theft; continuous monitoring is critical., Token management (rotation, encryption, secure storage) is essential to prevent API-based breaches., Human error (phishing susceptibility) remains a top risk; ongoing training is vital., OAuth abuse and inactive MFA are persistent vulnerabilities in SaaS environments., Layered defense strategies (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) can mitigate SaaS breach impacts.
What recommendations were made to prevent future incidents ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Recommendations: Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing, AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols.
What are the key lessons learned from past incidents ?
Key Lessons Learned: The key lessons learned from past incidents are SaaS threats are evolving with AI-powered phishing and token theft; continuous monitoring is critical.,Token management (rotation, encryption, secure storage) is essential to prevent API-based breaches.,Human error (phishing susceptibility) remains a top risk; ongoing training is vital.,OAuth abuse and inactive MFA are persistent vulnerabilities in SaaS environments.,Layered defense strategies (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) can mitigate SaaS breach impacts.
What recommendations has the company implemented to improve cybersecurity ?
Implemented Recommendations: The company has implemented the following recommendations to improve cybersecurity: Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing and AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**..
References
Where can I find more information about each incident ?
Incident : data breach INT000101124
Source: Troy Hunt
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Source: Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Source: Google Security Blog (Salesforce Breach Disclosure, 2025)
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Source: Internet Archive Breach Notification (2024)
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Source: Kaseya 365 User Documentation
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Source: Nieman Lab
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Source: Mashable
Where can stakeholders find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices ?
Additional Resources: Stakeholders can find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices at and Source: Troy Hunt, and Source: Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025, and Source: Google Security Blog (Salesforce Breach Disclosure, 2025), and Source: Internet Archive Breach Notification (2024), and Source: Kaseya 365 User Documentation, and Source: Nieman Lab, and Source: Mashable.
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the investigation for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Investigation Status: Closed (Public Disclosures Issued)
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Investigation Status: Ongoing (unresolved archiving decline; 2024 breach investigated but details scarce)
How does the company communicate the status of incident investigations to stakeholders ?
Communication of Investigation Status: The company communicates the status of incident investigations to stakeholders through Public Disclosure (Both Incidents), Statements To Nieman Lab/Mashable and No Official Link Between Archiving Decline And Legal Pressures.
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
Were there any advisories issued to stakeholders or customers for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Stakeholder Advisories: MSPs advised to strengthen SaaS security postures and adopt layered defenses.
Customer Advisories: Google: Likely notified affected SMB customers (no public details).Internet Archive: Advised 31M users to reset passwords and enable MFA.
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Customer Advisories: Statements via media (Nieman Lab, Mashable)
What advisories does the company provide to stakeholders and customers following an incident ?
Advisories Provided: The company provides the following advisories to stakeholders and customers following an incident: were MSPs advised to strengthen SaaS security postures and adopt layered defenses., Google: Likely Notified Affected Smb Customers (No Public Details)., Internet Archive: Advised 31M Users To Reset Passwords And Enable Mfa., , Statements Via Media (Nieman Lab, Mashable) and .
Initial Access Broker
How did the initial access broker gain entry for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Entry Point: Voice Phishing (Google Salesforce), Unrotated Api Tokens (Internet Archive),
High Value Targets: Customer Contact Databases (Google), User Account Credentials (Internet Archive),
Data Sold on Dark Web: Customer Contact Databases (Google), User Account Credentials (Internet Archive),
Post-Incident Analysis
What were the root causes and corrective actions taken for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach INT4192641100925
Root Causes: Inadequate Token Management (Internet Archive)., Successful Social Engineering (Google Salesforce)., Lack Of Proactive Monitoring For Hidden Saas Risks (Both).,
Corrective Actions: Token Rotation/Encryption Policies (Internet Archive)., Enhanced Phishing Training (Google)., Layered Security Adoption (E.G., Kaseya 365 User).,
Incident : Service Degradation INT1932219102725
Root Causes: Technical Failures (Indexation Issues), Resource Allocation Constraints, Legal Pressures Diverting Funds, Financial Deficit (32.7M Expenses Vs 23M Revenue In 2023),
Corrective Actions: Planned Addition Of Missing Snapshots, Unspecified Operational Adjustments,
What is the company's process for conducting post-incident analysis ?
Post-Incident Analysis Process: The company's process for conducting post-incident analysis is described as Recommended (Post-Breach).
What corrective actions has the company taken based on post-incident analysis ?
Corrective Actions Taken: The company has taken the following corrective actions based on post-incident analysis: Token Rotation/Encryption Policies (Internet Archive)., Enhanced Phishing Training (Google)., Layered Security Adoption (E.G., Kaseya 365 User)., , Planned Addition Of Missing Snapshots, Unspecified Operational Adjustments, .
Additional Questions
General Information
Who was the attacking group in the last incident ?
Last Attacking Group: The attacking group in the last incident was an ShinyHunters (UNC6040)Unknown (Internet Archive Breach).
Incident Details
What was the most recent incident detected ?
Most Recent Incident Detected: The most recent incident detected was on 2025-05-17.
What was the most recent incident publicly disclosed ?
Most Recent Incident Publicly Disclosed: The most recent incident publicly disclosed was on 2025-10-01.
Impact of the Incidents
What was the most significant data compromised in an incident ?
Most Significant Data Compromised: The most significant data compromised in an incident were email addresses, usernames, bcrypt password hashes, system data, , User account details, 31M user accounts (Internet Archive: emails, usernames, bcrypt-hashed passwords, internal records), Google Salesforce: customer contact details and notes (SMB customers), , Historical web snapshots (news sites), Potential user data (from 2024 breach) and .
What was the most significant system affected in an incident ?
Most Significant System Affected: The most significant system affected in an incident was Salesforce Database (Google)Zendesk Support System (Internet Archive) and Wayback MachineInternet Archive main website.
Response to the Incidents
What containment measures were taken in the most recent incident ?
Containment Measures in Most Recent Incident: The containment measures taken in the most recent incident were Token Rotation (Internet Archive, post-breach)Phishing Awareness Training (Google, implied) and Restoration of services after 2024 breachPlanned addition of missing snapshots (per Mark Graham).
Data Breach Information
What was the most sensitive data compromised in a breach ?
Most Sensitive Data Compromised: The most sensitive data compromised in a breach were Google Salesforce: customer contact details and notes (SMB customers), usernames, Historical web snapshots (news sites), email addresses, 31M user accounts (Internet Archive: emails, usernames, bcrypt-hashed passwords, internal records), bcrypt password hashes, User account details, Potential user data (from 2024 breach) and system data.
What was the number of records exposed in the most significant breach ?
Number of Records Exposed in Most Significant Breach: The number of records exposed in the most significant breach was 62.0M.
Regulatory Compliance
What was the most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation ?
Most Significant Legal Action: The most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation was Lawsuits, Lawsuits from publishers (Hachette, Wiley, Penguin Random House), Lawsuits from record labels (Great 78 Project), .
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What was the most significant lesson learned from past incidents ?
Most Significant Lesson Learned: The most significant lesson learned from past incidents was Layered defense strategies (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) can mitigate SaaS breach impacts.
What was the most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity ?
Most Significant Recommendation Implemented: The most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity was Adopt **continuous monitoring** for both known threats (phishing, malware) and hidden risks (orphaned links, inactive accounts)., Use **automated threat detection/remediation** tools (e.g., Kaseya 365 User) to reduce response times., Conduct **regular security audits** for SaaS integrations, API tokens, and user permissions., Implement **proactive SaaS security measures**: layered defenses, MFA enforcement, and token management., Ensure **business continuity plans** include SaaS-specific recovery protocols., Train employees on **advanced phishing tactics** (vishing and AI-powered scams) and **secure file-sharing practices**..
References
What is the most recent source of information about an incident ?
Most Recent Source: The most recent source of information about an incident are Internet Archive Breach Notification (2024), Troy Hunt, Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025, Google Security Blog (Salesforce Breach Disclosure, 2025), Kaseya 365 User Documentation, Nieman Lab and Mashable.
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the most recent investigation ?
Current Status of Most Recent Investigation: The current status of the most recent investigation is Closed (Public Disclosures Issued).
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
What was the most recent stakeholder advisory issued ?
Most Recent Stakeholder Advisory: The most recent stakeholder advisory issued was MSPs advised to strengthen SaaS security postures and adopt layered defenses., .
What was the most recent customer advisory issued ?
Most Recent Customer Advisory: The most recent customer advisory issued were an Google: Likely notified affected SMB customers (no public details).Internet Archive: Advised 31M users to reset passwords and enable MFA., Statements via media (Nieman Lab and Mashable).
Initial Access Broker
Post-Incident Analysis
What was the most significant root cause identified in post-incident analysis ?
Most Significant Root Cause: The most significant root cause identified in post-incident analysis was Inadequate token management (Internet Archive).Successful social engineering (Google Salesforce).Lack of proactive monitoring for hidden SaaS risks (both)., Technical failures (indexation issues)Resource allocation constraintsLegal pressures diverting fundsFinancial deficit (32.7M expenses vs 23M revenue in 2023).
What was the most significant corrective action taken based on post-incident analysis ?
Most Significant Corrective Action: The most significant corrective action taken based on post-incident analysis was Token rotation/encryption policies (Internet Archive).Enhanced phishing training (Google).Layered security adoption (e.g., Kaseya 365 User)., Planned addition of missing snapshotsUnspecified operational adjustments.
.png)
Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)
Description
Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
References
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/0276479e7d0e280e0f8d26fa567d3b7aa97a516f
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/05fe6686a97fa0bcd3cf157805b3612033f975bc
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/3240d856d942727372a705252f7c8c115394a41e
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/19.2.16
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/20.3.14
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/21.0.1
- https://github.com/angular/angular/security/advisories/GHSA-58c5-g7wp-6w37
Description
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Access Data Using Our API
Get company history
curl -i -X GET 'https://api.rankiteo.com/underwriter-getcompany-history?linkedin_id=internet-archive' -H 'apikey: YOUR_API_KEY_HERE'
RapidWhat Do We Measure ?
Incident
Finding
Grade
Digital Assets
Every week, Rankiteo analyzes billions of signals to give organizations a sharper, faster view of emerging risks. With deeper, more actionable intelligence at their fingertips, security teams can outpace threat actors, respond instantly to Zero-Day attacks, and dramatically shrink their risk exposure window.
These are some of the factors we use to calculate the overall score:
Network Security
Identify exposed access points, detect misconfigured SSL certificates, and uncover vulnerabilities across the network infrastructure.
SBOM (Software Bill of Materials)
Gain visibility into the software components used within an organization to detect vulnerabilities, manage risk, and ensure supply chain security.
CMDB (Configuration Management Database)
Monitor and manage all IT assets and their configurations to ensure accurate, real-time visibility across the company's technology environment.
Threat Intelligence
Leverage real-time insights on active threats, malware campaigns, and emerging vulnerabilities to proactively defend against evolving cyberattacks.
Rankiteo is a unified scoring and risk platform that analyzes billions of signals weekly to help organizations gain faster, more actionable insights into emerging threats. Empowering teams to outpace adversaries and reduce exposure.
