Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » MagMutual » MAG1784759901

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (MAG1784759901)

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 Incident754 / 1000
Company Score After Incident690 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERMAG1784759901
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORUnauthorized Access
DATA EXPOSEDSensitive files including names, clinical...
INCIDENT DATE27/04/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of MagMutual'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 MagMutual 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 MagMutual breach identified under incident ID MAG1784759901.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of MagMutual's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/mag-mutual, the number of followers: 7039, the industry type: Insurance and the number of employees: 554 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 690 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 MagMutual and their customers.

On 23 June 2026, MagMutual Insurance Co. disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "MagMutual Insurance Co. Data Breach".

MagMutual Insurance Co., a physician-owned medical malpractice insurer, disclosed a data breach involving unauthorized access to its systems.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting MagMutual’s network, and exposing Sensitive files including names, clinical details, demographic data, and financial records.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Breach notice on website, dedicated helpline (888-289-7022), and mailing address for affected individuals.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Breach notice on website, dedicated helpline (888-289-7022), and mailing address for 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 Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including unauthorized access to its systems, and accessed MagMutual’s network between April 28 and May 4, 2026 and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating suspicious activity detected on April 28, 2026 (no specific vector mentioned). Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified OS Credential Dumping (T1003) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized party accessed network (implies potential credential theft) and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating high-value healthcare/financial data accessed (suggests privileged credentials). Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating accessed sensitive files including clinical and financial records and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating potentially exfiltrating sensitive files (implies file system exploration). Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating names, clinical details, demographic data, and financial records compromised and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating healthcare provider data accessed (likely from centralized repositories). Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating threat actor Leaknet claimed to have obtained MagMutual’s data and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating data published on dark web forum (implies external transfer). Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no evidence of destruction, but exfiltration confirmed and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating clinical/financial data accessed (potential for tampering). 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 (70%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (50%)
Credential Access
OS Credential Dumping (60%)
Credentials from Password Stores (50%)
Discovery
Account Discovery (60%)
File and Directory Discovery (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Data from Information Repositories (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service (60%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)

Sources & References