Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Presence Health » MONPREOSF1786975625

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (MONPREOSF1786975625)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-213
Company Score Before Incident771 / 1000
Company Score After Incident558 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERMONPREOSF1786975625
Type of Cyber IncidentRansomware
ATTACK VECTORransomware, unauthorized_server_access
DATA EXPOSEDPHI, medical images, personally identifiable...
INCIDENT DATE28/02/2023
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Presence Health's Ransomware 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 Presence Health 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 Presence Health breach identified under incident ID MONPREOSF1786975625.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Presence Health's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/presence-health, the number of followers: 19423, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 4078 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 771 and after the incident was 558 with a difference of -213 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 Presence Health and their customers.

OSF Healthcare System recently reported "HIPAA Breach Notification Deadlines Under Scrutiny: Key Enforcement Actions Highlight Compliance Risks", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Recent enforcement actions by the U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing PHI, medical images and personally identifiable information, with nearly ['21,778', '15 million'] records at risk, plus an estimated financial loss of ['$552,250', '$475,000', '$5,000', '$10,000'].

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as HIPAA’s notification deadlines are non-negotiable, and delays even during good-faith investigations are compliance failures. Proactive policy reviews, training, and documentation are essential to avoiding costly penalties, and recommending next steps like Notify within 60 days of breach discovery, even if the full scope isn't determined, Treat ransomware attacks as breaches unless a documented risk assessment proves low PHI compromise probability and Document all breach-related activities, including discovery dates, risk assessments, and law enforcement requests.

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 Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack (Nephilim variant) was detected on April 23, 2021 and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized server access exposed 21,778 individuals’ medical images. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating nephilim ransomware variant used for data encryption. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating nephilim ransomware encrypted data; PHI compromised and Defacement (T1491) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware attack threatening organizations existence. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating 15 million individuals’ PHI accessed by unauthorized actor and Automated Exfiltration (T1020) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating medical images and PHI compromised in large-scale breach. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized actor accessed PHI of 15 million individuals. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating nephilim ransomware variant used for encryption and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating delayed breach notifications despite HIPAA deadlines. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Data Encrypted for Impact (90%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (60%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (95%)
Defacement (50%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Automated Exfiltration (60%)
Credential Access
Valid Accounts (70%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (70%)
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (60%)