Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Microsoft » MIC1784816949

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (MIC1784816949)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-3
Company Score Before Incident652 / 1000
Company Score After Incident649 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERMIC1784816949
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORLocal
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE13/07/2026
STATUSPatched; no active exploitation reported

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Microsoft's Vulnerability 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 Microsoft 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 Microsoft breach identified under incident ID MIC1784816949.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Microsoft's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/microsoft, the number of followers: 28486112, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 233556 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 652 and after the incident was 649 with a difference of -3 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 Microsoft and their customers.

On 14 July 2026, Microsoft disclosed Local Privilege Escalation issues under the banner "High-Severity Windows 11 & Server 2025 Vulnerability Exploits Brokering File System Flaw".

A critical local privilege escalation vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-50458 (CVSS 7.8), has been identified in Microsoft’s Brokering File System (BFS), affecting Windows 11 (versions 24H2, 25H2, and 26H1) and Windows Server 2025, including Server Core installations.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Windows 11 (24H2, 25H2, 26H1), Windows Server 2025 (including Server Core).

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Patch released (KB5101650), and began remediation that includes Apply July 14, 2026 Patch Tuesday update (KB5101650).

The case underscores how Patched; no active exploitation reported, and recommending next steps like Verify system builds against vulnerable ranges and prioritize patching (KB5101650).

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 Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating cVE-2026-50458 (CVSS 7.8) allows SYSTEM-level privileges via use-after-free in BFS and Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism: Bypass User Account Control (T1548.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exploitation bypasses sandbox protections (e.g., AppContainer and UWP apps). Under the Initial Access tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (85%), supported by evidence indicating successful exploitation requires local authenticated access. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating bypasses sandbox protections via crafted IOCTL requests to BFS and Uncommonly Used Port (T1065) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating exploitation leverages IOCTL requests to manipulate vulnerable path. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (75%), supported by evidence indicating attackers leverage crafted IOCTL requests to trigger memory corruption. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (95%)
Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism: Bypass User Account Control (80%)
Initial Access
Valid Accounts (85%)
Defense Evasion
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (70%)
Uncommonly Used Port (50%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (75%)

Sources & References