Memorial Hospital and Manor Breach Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (MEM47104747112425)

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the Memorial Hospital and Manor breach identified under incident ID MEM47104747112425.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Memorial Hospital and Manor's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/memorial-hospital-and-manor, the number of followers: 264, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 143 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 671 and after the incident was 645 with a difference of -26 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 Memorial Hospital and Manor and their customers.

On 02 November 2024, Memorial Hospital and Manor (Hospital Authority of the City of Bainbridge and Decatur County) disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Memorial Hospital & Manor Data Breach (November 2024)".

A targeted cyberattack on Memorial Hospital and Manor’s internal network in November 2024 resulted in unauthorized access to files containing sensitive personal and health information of approximately 105,000 current and former patients.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Internal network files, and exposing Names, Dates of birth and Social Security numbers, with nearly 105,000 records at risk, plus an estimated financial loss of {'settlement_fund': {'attorneys_fees': '$500,000', 'service_awards': '$1,500 per class representative', 'medical_data_monitoring': 'Cost determined by number of claims', 'payments_to_claimants': 'Total determined by number of valid claims'}, 'claim_options': [{'type': 'Documented losses', 'max_amount': '$5,000', 'coverage_period': '2024-11-02 to 2026-01-05', 'eligible_expenses': ['Credit monitoring fees', 'ID replacement costs', 'Postage for bank communications', 'Identity theft or fraud-related losses']}, {'type': 'Lost time compensation', 'max_amount': '$100', 'rate': '$25/hour (max 4 hours)', 'eligible_activities': ['Changing passwords', 'Investigating suspicious activity', 'Researching the incident']}, {'type': 'Flat payment', 'amount': '$40'}]}.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Notice sent to affected individuals; class action settlement with claim options (online/mail).

The case underscores how Settled (class action lawsuit), with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Notice sent to 105,000 affected individuals with claim instructions.

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.

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 moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating targeted cyberattack that compromised its **internal network** and Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access to files containing sensitive patient data. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including unauthorized access to files containing **sensitive personal and health information** of ~105,000 patients, and **Names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, protected health records** exposed. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol: Exfiltration Over Unencrypted/Obfuscated Non-C2 Protocol (T1048.003) with moderate to high confidence (85%), with evidence including **data exfiltration such as Likely (unauthorized access to files)**, and **105,000 records** with PII/PHI compromised. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating **no explicit mention of encryption/ransomware**, but files were accessed unauthorizedly, Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with lower confidence (10%), supported by evidence indicating **ransomware such as null** in incident details (low confidence, included for completeness), and Identity Theft (T1659) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including exposing patients to **identity theft, fraud, and medical data exploitation**, and **SSNs and PHI** compromised (high identity theft risk). Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Indicator Removal: File Deletion (T1070.004) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating **no remediation details provided**, but unauthorized access suggests possible log/trace cleanup. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.