Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Jamf » JAMHUNSNYRECHACLASTANKLUBEY1784126732

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (JAMHUNSNYRECHACLASTANKLUBEY1784126732)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-59
Company Score Before Incident765 / 1000
Company Score After Incident706 / 1000
Company LinkView Jamf Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERJAMHUNSNYRECHACLASTANKLUBEY1784126732
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORCompromised OAuth Token
DATA EXPOSEDBusiness contact and CRM data
INCIDENT DATE11/06/2025
STATUSOngoing (as of June 2026)

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Jamf'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 Jamf 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 Jamf breach identified under incident ID JAMHUNSNYRECHACLASTANKLUBEY1784126732.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Jamf's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/jamf-software, the number of followers: 124907, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 2530 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 765 and after the incident was 706 with a difference of -59 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 Jamf and their customers.

On 15 June 2025, Klue disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Klue Breach Exposes 200 Firms via Forgotten 4-Year-Old Credential".

In June 2025, a dormant credential issued by competitive-intelligence platform Klue in 2022 became the entry point for a breach affecting nearly 200 companies, including prominent cybersecurity vendors.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Salesforce environments, and exposing Business contact and CRM data.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Public disclosure by Klue on June 15, 2025; affected firms acknowledged exposure later.

The case underscores how Ongoing (as of June 2026), teams are taking away lessons such as The incident highlights risks of dormant credentials, fourth-party risk, and the need for automated expiration of pilot credentials, minimum-scoped OAuth grants, and recurring token audits, and recommending next steps like Automated expiration for pilot credentials, Minimum-scoped OAuth grants (avoiding broad CRM access) and Recurring token audits to identify stale integrations, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Cyber insurers tightening scrutiny of third-party integrations; security vendors facing heightened procurement questions.

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 Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including dormant credential issued by Klue in 2022 became the entry point, and exploited an unmonitored OAuth token to access Salesforce environments and Trusted Relationship (T1199) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including fourth-party risk such as a vendor’s vendor (Klue) becoming the weak link, and oAuth tokens to pull data from connected Salesforce instances. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including exploited an unmonitored OAuth token to access Salesforce environments, and legacy credential originally created for a limited pilot. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery: Cloud Account (T1087.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including accessed Salesforce environments en masse, and automated data exfiltration from 195–200 companies. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Cloud Storage Object: Cloud Storage (T1213.001) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including data theft from an unspecified number of customers, and business contact and CRM data compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including automated data exfiltration from 195–200 companies, and data exfiltration such as true and Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including attackers used a compromised legacy credential to infiltrate, and ransom note from attackers via compromised email. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with moderate confidence (60%), with evidence including brand reputation impact such as heightened procurement scrutiny, and security vendors facing procurement questions. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including unmonitored legacy credential (4-year-old OAuth token), and no zero-day exploits or sophisticated malware used and Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (T1550.001) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including exploited an unmonitored OAuth token, and oAuth tokens to pull data from Salesforce. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (95%)
Trusted Relationship (90%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (95%)
Lateral Movement
Account Discovery: Cloud Account (80%)
Collection
Data from Cloud Storage Object: Cloud Storage (90%)
Exfiltration
Transfer Data to Cloud Account (90%)
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Impact
Defacement: Internal Defacement (60%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (90%)
Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (90%)