Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Mastercom Australia » QUEMAS1776133442

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (QUEMAS1776133442)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-118
Company Score Before Incident751 / 1000
Company Score After Incident633 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERQUEMAS1776133442
Type of Cyber IncidentRansomware
ATTACK VECTORCompromised accounts
DATA EXPOSEDCustomer records, HR documents, financial...
INCIDENT DATE10/04/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Mastercom Australia's Ransomware 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 Mastercom Australia 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 Mastercom Australia breach identified under incident ID QUEMAS1776133442.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Mastercom Australia's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/mastercom-australia, the number of followers: 1044, the industry type: Telecommunications and the number of employees: 23 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 751 and after the incident was 633 with a difference of -118 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 Mastercom Australia and their customers.

On 11 April 2025, Mastercom disclosed Ransomware, Data Breach issues under the banner "INC Ransom Breaches Mastercom, Leaks Sensitive Data from Australian Communications Firm".

The INC Ransom hacking group has claimed responsibility for a cyberattack on Mastercom, a Granville, New South Wales-based communications provider, and published stolen internal and customer data on its darknet leak site.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing Customer records, HR documents, financial data, fault reports, internal building layouts, photos of cable infrastructure, locations of communications equipment.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Brief statement acknowledging the breach.

Overall, the incident is a reminder of why proactive monitoring and strong governance matter.

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 high confidence (90%), with evidence including gains access via compromised accounts, and attack vector such as Compromised accounts. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating deploys malicious files (e.g., win.exe). Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating escalates privileges after compromised accounts. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised accounts used for access. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrated fault reports, internal building layouts, infrastructure photos. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating customer records, HR docs, financial data, infrastructure data compromised and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data from Queensland Communications (acquired in 2013) also exposed. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration confirmed; published on darknet leak site. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack; no explicit encryption details and Defacement (T1491) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data published on INC Ransom’s darknet leak site. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised accounts used to evade detection. 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 (90%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (80%)
Privilege Escalation
Valid Accounts (80%)
Credential Access
Valid Accounts (90%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data from Information Repositories (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Defacement (70%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (80%)

Sources & References