Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Linksys » DOMCISLINDRAFORMIMHIKUBI1781173672

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (DOMCISLINDRAFORMIMHIKUBI1781173672)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-18
Company Score Before Incident754 / 1000
Company Score After Incident736 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERDOMCISLINDRAFORMIMHIKUBI1781173672
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORExploitation of vulnerabilities in SOHO routers and IoT devices, Tor-hidden command-and-control servers
DATA EXPOSEDReconnaissance data, network intelligence
INCIDENT DATE31/12/2023
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Linksys'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 Linksys 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 Linksys breach identified under incident ID DOMCISLINDRAFORMIMHIKUBI1781173672.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Linksys's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/linksys, the number of followers: 14991, the industry type: Computer Networking Products and the number of employees: 405 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 754 and after the incident was 736 with a difference of -18 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 Linksys and their customers.

U.S. critical infrastructure (military entities) recently reported "China-Linked JDY Botnet Expands, Targeting U.S. Critical Infrastructure", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A resurgent botnet tied to China-backed threat actors, dubbed JDY, has grown into one of the most sophisticated reconnaissance tools in operation.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting 1,500+ SOHO routers and IoT devices, and exposing Reconnaissance data, network intelligence.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as The resilience of botnets like JDY highlights the need for rapid patching of vulnerabilities, enhanced monitoring of SOHO devices, and improved attribution techniques for Tor-hidden C2 servers, and recommending next steps like Immediate patching of newly disclosed vulnerabilities in SOHO and IoT devices, Enhanced network monitoring to detect anomalous scanning activity and Implementation of behavioral-based detection systems to identify botnet traffic.

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 Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including exploitation of vulnerabilities in SOHO routers and IoT devices, and cVE-2026-35616 (Fortinet flaw) exploited within hours and External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including platypus remote shell tool used for device management, and tor-hidden command-and-control (C2) servers. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter: Unix Shell (T1059.004) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating lightweight bash dropper to infect devices and download payloads and Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exploits newly disclosed vulnerabilities within hours of public disclosure. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Server Software Component: Web Shell (T1505.003) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating platypus remote shell tool used for device management and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating compromised SOHO routers and IoT devices (likely default credentials). Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating blends malicious traffic with legitimate activity to evade detection, Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (T1564.003) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating tor-hidden command-and-control (C2) servers, Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating payloads compressed and encrypted before exfiltration, and Proxy: Multi-hop Proxy (T1090.003) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating scans distributed across thousands of IPs to bypass blocklists. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Network Service Discovery (T1046) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating scans span TCP, UDP, SSL, and ICMP protocols for reconnaissance and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating botnet used to gather intelligence on U.S. critical infrastructure. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating reconnaissance data and network intelligence collected and Automated Collection (T1119) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating botnet conducts automated scanning across thousands of devices. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating tor-hidden command-and-control (C2) servers, Proxy: Multi-hop Proxy (T1090.003) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating distributed scanning across thousands of IPs to evade detection, and Encrypted Channel: Symmetric Cryptography (T1573.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating results compressed, encrypted, and sent back to central server. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration via compressed and encrypted payloads to C2 servers and Automated Exfiltration (T1020) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating botnet automates data collection and exfiltration. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service: Service Exhaustion Flood (T1499.002) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating potential disruption of critical infrastructure networks and Gather Victim Identity Information: Credentials (T1589.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating intelligence gathering on U.S. military and critical infrastructure. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Exploit Public-Facing Application (90%)
External Remote Services (80%)
Execution
Command and Scripting Interpreter: Unix Shell (90%)
Exploitation for Client Execution (80%)
Persistence
Server Software Component: Web Shell (70%)
Valid Accounts (60%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (80%)
Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window (70%)
Obfuscated Files or Information (80%)
Proxy: Multi-hop Proxy (90%)
Discovery
Network Service Discovery (90%)
File and Directory Discovery (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Automated Collection (90%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (80%)
Proxy: Multi-hop Proxy (90%)
Encrypted Channel: Symmetric Cryptography (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Automated Exfiltration (80%)
Impact
Endpoint Denial of Service: Service Exhaustion Flood (60%)
Gather Victim Identity Information: Credentials (70%)