Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » n8n » N8N1774873530

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (N8N1774873530)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-5
Company Score Before Incident721 / 1000
Company Score After Incident716 / 1000
Company LinkView n8n Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERN8N1774873530
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORAuthenticated workflow modification
DATA EXPOSEDSensitive data access
INCIDENT DATE29/03/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of n8n'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 n8n 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 n8n breach identified under incident ID N8N1774873530.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of n8n's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/n8n, the number of followers: 256751, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 663 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 721 and after the incident was 716 with a difference of -5 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 n8n and their customers.

n8n recently reported "Critical RCE Vulnerability in n8n Workflow Automation Platform Exposes Servers to Attack", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A severe security flaw in n8n, a popular open-source workflow automation tool, has been identified as CVE-2026-33660, enabling Remote Code Execution (RCE) attacks on host servers.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting n8n workflow automation platform servers, and exposing Sensitive data access.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Restricting workflow creation/modification permissions to trusted personnel, disabling the vulnerable component by adding `n8n-nodes-base.merge` to the `NODES_EXCLUDE` environment variable, and began remediation that includes Official patches released by n8n development team.

The case underscores how and recommending next steps like Update n8n instances immediately to the latest patched version. If unable to patch, restrict workflow permissions or disable the vulnerable component.

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 moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating critical RCE Vulnerability in n8n Workflow Automation Platform and Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exploitation requires only low-level privileges, such as the ability to create or modify workflows. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating remote Code Execution (RCE) attacks on host servers via Merge node with Combine by SQL mode and Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating execute arbitrary code via malicious SQL statements in AlaSQL sandbox. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating once compromised, attackers can escalate the attack to execute arbitrary code, gaining full administrative control. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Defense Evasion (T1211) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating bypass security controls via improper input validation (CWE-94 such as Code Injection) and Process Injection (T1055) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating sandbox escape in AlaSQL leading to local file read access. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (T1552.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating local file read access on the host via sandbox escape. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating access sensitive data via compromised n8n servers. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating threatens confidentiality, integrity, and availability of affected systems. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Resource Hijacking (T1496) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating full administrative control over the server, compromise of availability and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating compromise of integrity of affected systems. 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 (80%)
Valid Accounts (90%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (90%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter (80%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (80%)
Defense Evasion
Exploitation for Defense Evasion (80%)
Process Injection (70%)
Credential Access
Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Impact
Resource Hijacking (80%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (70%)

Sources & References