Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (ELEEXOLEDTRE1784199019)
The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.
Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis
Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis
- Timeline of Ledger'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 Ledger 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 Ledger breach identified under incident ID ELEEXOLEDTRE1784199019.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Ledger's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ledgerhq, the number of followers: 91625, the industry type: Computer and Network Security and the number of employees: 824 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 502 and after the incident was 482 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 Ledger and their customers.
A newly reported cybersecurity incident, "New macOS Infostealer Targets Cryptocurrency Wallets with Offline Attack Chain", has drawn attention.
Security researchers at SlowMist have uncovered a sophisticated macOS-focused infostealer designed to harvest credentials, wallet databases, and session data for offline cryptocurrency theft.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting macOS, and exposing Credentials, Wallet Databases and Session Data.
Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.
The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as Infostealers exploit the interplay between credentials, encrypted local stores, and user trust. Pairing stolen wallet databases with Keychain secrets and reused passwords creates a portable target for offline decryption. Users should avoid reusing passwords and enable multi-factor authentication where possible, and recommending next steps like Avoid reusing passwords across services, Enable multi-factor authentication for all accounts and Regularly monitor wallet and account activity.
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%), supported by evidence indicating fake Google API Connector update prompt to capture macOS password and Phishing: Spearphishing Link (T1566.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating phishing pages disguised as legitimate wallet applications (Ledger Live, Trezor Suite). Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating malware employs social engineering tactics, including fake update prompts. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating extracts sensitive information from Apple Keychain, Safari and Chromium browsers, Credentials from Password Stores: Keychain (T1555.001) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating harvests credentials from Apple Keychain, including Chrome Safe Storage secrets, Credentials from Password Stores: Credentials from Web Browsers (T1555.003) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating targets Safari and Chromium browsers for stored logins and cookies, and Steal Web Session Cookie (T1539) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating steals `tdata` directory containing Telegram session state and encryption keys. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating extracts wallet databases, Apple Notes, Telegram Desktop data, and browser data and Email Collection: Local Email Collection (T1114.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating targets Apple Notes, which may contain sensitive information. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating pairs stolen wallet databases with Keychain passwords for offline decryption. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Masquerading (T1036) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating fake Google API Connector update prompt and phishing pages for wallet apps and Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating phishing pages disguised as legitimate wallet applications (Ledger Live, Trezor Suite). Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Use Alternate Authentication Material: Web Session Cookie (T1550.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating hijacks Telegram sessions by restoring stolen `tdata` files on a compatible Mac. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating wallet databases are encrypted locally, but paired with stolen credentials and Financial Theft (T1657) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating offline cryptocurrency theft by decrypting wallet data with harvested credentials. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- Ledger Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ledgerhq/incident/ELEEXOLEDTRE1784199019
- Ledger CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ledgerhq
- Ledger Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/eleexoledtre1784199019-electrum-exodus-ledger-trezor-cyber-attack-june-2026/
- Ledger CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/ledgerhq/history
- Ledger CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://gbhackers.com/hackers-pair-stolen-wallet-databases/
- Rankiteo A.I CyberSecurity Rating methodology: https://www.rankiteo.com/Images/rankiteo_algo.pdf
- Rankiteo TPRM Scoring methodology: https://static.rankiteo.com/model/rankiteo_tprm_methodology.pdf