Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » PowerSchool » DAVCAECHAPOWKASFILMARSOLNAS1770898846

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (DAVCAECHAPOWKASFILMARSOLNAS1770898846)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact0
Company Score Before Incident100 / 1000
Company Score After Incident100 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERDAVCAECHAPOWKASFILMARSOLNAS1770898846
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORSupply Chain Attack, Phishing, Exploiting Unpatched Systems, AI-Driven Attacks, Vishing
DATA EXPOSED62M students and 9.5M teachers...
INCIDENT DATE24/12/2024
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of PowerSchool's Cyber Attack 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 PowerSchool 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 PowerSchool breach identified under incident ID DAVCAECHAPOWKASFILMARSOLNAS1770898846.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of PowerSchool's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/powerschool-group-llc, the number of followers: 159772, the industry type: E-Learning Providers and the number of employees: 3504 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 100 and after the incident was 100 with a difference of 0 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 PowerSchool and their customers.

PowerSchool recently reported "Ransomware Trends and High-Profile Attacks (2024-2025)", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Ransomware remains a critical threat to governments, businesses, and critical infrastructure, disrupting healthcare, fuel distribution, retail, and identity security.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Healthcare, Fuel distribution and Retail, and exposing 62M students and 9.5M teachers (PowerSchool), 5.6M patient records (Yale New Haven Health) and 1TB of data (NASCAR), with nearly ['62M', '9.5M', '5.6M', '1TB', '2.7M', '193M', '16.6M'] records at risk.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

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 Supply Chain Compromise (T1195) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including supply Chain Attacks – Threat actors target software vendors, 2023 MoveIt Transfer breach (Clop ransomware gang), and 2021 Kaseya attack (1,500+ MSP customers affected), Phishing (T1566) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including phishing remains a primary infection vector, and phishing & AI-Driven Attacks – AI enhances social engineering lures, Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting Unpatched Systems – Most ransomware exploits known flaws in outdated software, and Drive-by Compromise (T1189) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating aI-Driven Attacks – Attack automation may include drive-by techniques. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including phishing remains a primary infection vector, and aI-driven attacks enhance social engineering lures and Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) – Pre-built ransomware tools and infrastructure. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified BITS Jobs (T1197) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware strains like LockBit 5.0 use advanced persistence mechanisms and Boot or Logon Autostart Execution (T1547) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware strains often establish persistence via autostart. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting Unpatched Systems – Known flaws in outdated software and Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism (T1548) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware often abuses elevation mechanisms for privilege escalation. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware strains like LockBit 5.0 use private negotiation portals, Impair Defenses (T1562) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware often disables security tools to evade detection, and Indicator Removal (T1070) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 85% of attacks go unreported (BlackFog). Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups often use brute force to access credentials and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating phishing and AI-driven attacks target password stores. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups perform account discovery for lateral movement and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration and encryption require file discovery. Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation of Remote Services (T1210) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating supply chain attacks enable lateral movement across downstream victims and Remote Services (T1021) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware spreads via remote services in unpatched systems. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including 62M students and 9.5M teachers data compromised (PowerSchool), and 193M victims (Change Healthcare) and Data from Network Shared Drive (T1039) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups exfiltrate data from shared drives. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups use C2 channels for data exfiltration and encryption and Ingress Tool Transfer (T1105) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating raaS tools and infrastructure require tool transfer. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including 1TB of data stolen (NASCAR), and data exfiltration confirmed in multiple incidents and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups use web services for data exfiltration. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including ransomware strains encrypt data for extortion, and data encryption confirmed in multiple incidents, Service Stop (T1489) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including disrupted loan services (LoanDepot), and service disruptions and revenue losses (Ingram Micro), Defacement (T1491) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware groups may deface systems as part of extortion, and Inhibit System Recovery (T1490) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware often disables recovery mechanisms. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Supply Chain Compromise (90%)
Phishing (80%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (70%)
Drive-by Compromise (50%)
Execution
User Execution (80%)
Command and Scripting Interpreter (70%)
Persistence
BITS Jobs (60%)
Boot or Logon Autostart Execution (60%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (70%)
Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism (60%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (80%)
Impair Defenses (70%)
Indicator Removal (70%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (60%)
Credentials from Password Stores (70%)
Discovery
Account Discovery (70%)
File and Directory Discovery (80%)
Lateral Movement
Exploitation of Remote Services (70%)
Remote Services (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data from Network Shared Drive (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (80%)
Ingress Tool Transfer (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (90%)
Service Stop (80%)
Defacement (50%)
Inhibit System Recovery (70%)