Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Qantas » QANWESHAW1768393070

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (QANWESHAW1768393070)

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 NUMBERQANWESHAW1768393070
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORSocial Engineering, Third-Party Vendors
DATA EXPOSEDTrue
INCIDENT DATE27/06/2025
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Qantas'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 Qantas 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 Qantas breach identified under incident ID QANWESHAW1768393070.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Qantas's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/qantas, the number of followers: 638116, the industry type: Airlines and Aviation and the number of employees: 17844 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 Qantas and their customers.

On 26 June 2025, Hawaiian Airlines disclosed Cyber Attack and Data Breach issues under the banner "Cyber Attacks on Airlines Ahead of Fourth of July Holiday".

Multiple airlines, including Hawaiian Airlines, WestJet, and Qantas, reported cyber attacks compromising their IT systems ahead of the Fourth of July holiday travel surge.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting IT Systems, and exposing True.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like True, and began remediation that includes True, and stakeholders are being briefed through True.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering True.

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 third-party customer service platform was compromised, and third-party vendor exploits to breach large organizations, Trusted Relationship (T1199) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating third-party vendor exploits to breach large organizations, and Phishing (T1566) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating scattered Spider...known for using social engineering. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating social engineering...to breach large organizations. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Create Account (T1136) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating third-party vendor exploits (implied access persistence). Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating third-party vendor exploits (implied valid accounts). Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating third-party customer service platform was compromised and Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (T1550.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating third-party vendor exploits (implied OAuth/token abuse). Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Unsecured Credentials: Cloud Instance Metadata API (T1552.005) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating third-party customer service platform was compromised and Modify Authentication Process (T1556) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating social engineering...to breach large organizations. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating iT systems compromised (implied account enumeration). Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data breach impacting airline IT systems. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data breach...ahead of the Fourth of July holiday. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Defacement (T1491) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating brand reputation impact noted in incident. 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%)
Trusted Relationship (80%)
Phishing (70%)
Execution
User Execution (60%)
Persistence
Create Account (50%)
Privilege Escalation
Valid Accounts (70%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (60%)
Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (50%)
Credential Access
Unsecured Credentials: Cloud Instance Metadata API (60%)
Modify Authentication Process (50%)
Discovery
Account Discovery (60%)
Collection
Data from Information Repositories (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Impact
Defacement (40%)