Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » OnlyFans » NETFACTIKBINONLMICAPPCONGOV1769182444

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (NETFACTIKBINONLMICAPPCONGOV1769182444)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-206
Company Score Before Incident565 / 1000
Company Score After Incident359 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERNETFACTIKBINONLMICAPPCONGOV1769182444
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORInfostealing Malware
DATA EXPOSED149 million credentials
INCIDENT DATE22/01/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of OnlyFans'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 OnlyFans 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 OnlyFans breach identified under incident ID NETFACTIKBINONLMICAPPCONGOV1769182444.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of OnlyFans's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/onlyfans, the number of followers: 81445, the industry type: Entertainment Providers and the number of employees: 5901 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 565 and after the incident was 359 with a difference of -206 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 OnlyFans and their customers.

Gmail recently reported "Massive Exposed Database Containing 149 Million Credentials Discovered Online", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Security researcher Jeremiah Fowler uncovered a publicly accessible database containing 149 million usernames and passwords, including credentials for major platforms and sensitive systems.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing 149 million credentials, with nearly 149 million records at risk.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Database taken offline by hosting provider.

The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as The incident highlights the risks of unsecured databases and the widespread impact of infostealer-driven breaches. It underscores the need for better security practices to prevent credential harvesting and unauthorized access, and recommending next steps like Implement stricter access controls for databases, Enhance monitoring for unauthorized access and Educate users on the risks of infostealing malware.

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%), supported by evidence indicating 149 million usernames and passwords...freely accessible via a web browser and Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (T1566.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating credentials were harvested via infostealing malware. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating infostealing malware...logs keystrokes when victims enter login details. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Input Capture: Keylogging (T1056.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating infostealing malware...logs keystrokes when victims enter login details and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 149 million usernames and passwords...including credentials for major platforms. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating credentials were harvested via infostealing malware and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating unsecured database containing 149 million usernames and passwords. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating credentials were harvested via infostealing malware and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating publicly accessible database...freely accessible via a web browser. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating database was taken offline by hosting provider and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating database continued to grow, suggesting ongoing data collection. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating unsecured database...freely accessible via a web browser. 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%)
Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (50%)
Execution
User Execution: Malicious File (80%)
Credential Access
Input Capture: Keylogging (90%)
Credentials from Password Stores (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data from Information Repositories (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Transfer Data to Cloud Account (60%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)
Defense Evasion
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (50%)