Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Rapid7

Rapid7 Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

r-7.co

Here’s a new cybersecurity posture: in full command. Rapid7 can help you command your attack surface, smash silos, stay steps ahead of attackers, and take breaches from “inevitable” to preventable. The Command platform, AI-powered technology, elite 24/7 services, and Rapid7 Labs prized research give control to organizations around the world. You can reduce vulnerabilities. Automate routine tasks. See imminent threats coming. And shut them down with confidence.


Rapid7 A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

Rapid7
Company Information
Website:https://r-7.co/3i5nlhP
Employees number:3,254
Number of followers:213,861
NAICS:541514
Industry Type:Computer and Network Security
Homepage:r-7.co
Rapid7 Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 700 and 749
logo
Rapid7Computer and Network Security
Updated:
22/05/2026
714/1000
Moderate
Ba
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
Rapid7 Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
Rapid7Computer and Network Security
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

Rapid7
Rapid7Moderate
Current Score
714Ba (MODERATE)
01000
3 incidents
-14.33 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
SEPTEMBER 2026
715Before Incident
AUGUST 2026
715Before Incident
JULY 2026
714Before Incident
JUNE 2026
711Before Incident
MAY 2026
714Before Incident
Vulnerability
29 May 2026Rapid7
Palo Alto Networks: Cyber Security News ®’s Post

Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Exploited in the Wild

709After Incident
CRITICAL-5
PAL1780115030
Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS Authentication Bypass Vulnerability Exploited in the Wild On May 29, 2026, CISA added CVE-2026-0257, a critical authentication bypass vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks’ PAN-OS and Prisma Access, to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog after confirming active exploitation in the wild. The flaw resides in the "authentication override" feature a non-default setting in GlobalProtect portals and gateways that issues session cookies to authenticated users, eliminating the need for repeated logins. The vulnerability is triggered when the same certificate used to encrypt and decrypt these cookies is also employed by another feature, such as the HTTPS service of the portal or gateway. Exploitation of this misconfiguration allows attackers to bypass authentication controls, potentially gaining unauthorized access to affected systems. The issue underscores the risks of improperly configured security features, even in enterprise-grade solutions. Organizations using PAN-OS or Prisma Access with the authentication override feature enabled are urged to review their deployments for shared certificate usage.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Authentication Bypass
IMPACT
Systems Affected: PAN-OS and Prisma Access with authentication override feature enabledOperational Impact: Unauthorized access to affected systems
MAY 2026
735Before Incident
Cyber Attack
21 May 2026Rapid7
Rapid7: Report: Rapid7 warns AI-driven attacks are accelerating vulnerability exploitation

AI-Driven Cyber Attacks Accelerate Exploitation, Shrinking Defense Windows – Rapid7 Q1 2026 Report

714After Incident
LOW-21
RAP1779423826
AI-Driven Cyber Attacks Accelerate Exploitation, Shrinking Defense Windows – Rapid7 Q1 2026 Report Rapid7’s Q1 2026 Threat Landscape Report reveals a sharp rise in AI-powered cyber attacks, with vulnerability exploitation now the dominant initial access vector accounting for 38% of managed detection and response (MDR) incident cases in the first quarter. This marks a shift from traditional attack methods, as threat actors increasingly bypass human targets to directly exploit internet-facing infrastructure. Key findings include: - Zero-click vulnerabilities made up half of actively exploited flaws in Q1, requiring no authentication or user interaction to compromise exposed networks. - The median time between public disclosure of high/critical-severity vulnerabilities and their inclusion in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog dropped from 8.5 days to just five days, reflecting faster attacker adoption. - SQL injection surpassed OS command injection as the most exploited vulnerability category, targeting widely deployed web applications. - Ransomware activity remained fragmented, with Qilin leading leak-site posts (357), followed by The Gentlemen (206) and Akira (174). - Remote monitoring and management (RMM) tools were the most abused technique (22.9% of observed malicious activity), ahead of ClickFix (18.8%) and Windows native scripts (10.4%). Rapid7’s senior vice president and chief scientist, Raj Samani, noted that AI is "rewriting the security equation," as attackers prioritize direct access to exposed systems, reducing defenders' response windows. Vice president of cyber intelligence Christiaan Beek added that the speed of modern attacks leaves security teams struggling to investigate every threat, allowing risk to accumulate. The report also highlighted that exploited vulnerabilities averaged 1.8 million online mentions (blogs, forums, social media) before active exploitation, underscoring the rapid weaponization of public disclosures.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
vulnerability_exploitationransomware
APRIL 2026
734Before Incident
MARCH 2026
750Before Incident
Cyber Attack
01 Mar 2026Rapid7
Rapid7: Hackers Use Microsoft Teams to Steal Credentials and Manipulate MFA

Iranian APT MuddyWater Deploys Chaos Ransomware as False Flag in Espionage Campaign

733After Incident
CRITICAL-17
RAP1778084674
Iranian APT MuddyWater Deploys Chaos Ransomware as False Flag in Espionage Campaign In early 2026, cybersecurity firm Rapid7 uncovered a sophisticated hybrid espionage campaign orchestrated by the Iranian Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) group MuddyWater (also known as Mango Sandstorm, Seedworm, or Static Kitten), affiliated with Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). Initially appearing as a Chaos ransomware attack a financially motivated operation the intrusion was later revealed to be a false flag designed to mask state-sponsored intelligence-gathering efforts. ### Attack Vector & Tactics The campaign began with unsolicited Microsoft Teams messages sent to employees, often impersonating IT support. Attackers engaged victims in interactive screen-sharing sessions, instructing them to: - Enter credentials into locally created files (credentials.txt, cred.txt). - Add attacker-controlled devices to their MFA configurations. - Execute discovery commands (ipconfig /all, whoami, net start). This technique exploited Teams’ trusted environment, bypassing traditional security controls a tactic observed in multiple 2026 campaigns, including a large-scale credential theft operation documented by Microsoft Defender Research in March. ### Post-Compromise Activity After harvesting credentials, the threat actor: - Authenticated to Domain Controllers using stolen accounts. - Deployed DWAgent and AnyDesk for persistent remote access. - Delivered a custom downloader (ms_upd.exe) from a command-and-control (C2) server (172.86.126[.]208:443), which registered victims with the domain moonzonet[.]com. - Installed Game.exe, a Remote Access Trojan (RAT) disguised as a legitimate Microsoft WebView2 application, enabling: - Arbitrary command execution (via cmd.exe or encoded PowerShell). - Chunked file uploads and interactive shell access. - Sandbox and virtual machine detection. - AES-256-GCM encrypted configuration storage (though critical strings remained in plaintext). ### False Flag & Attribution The use of Chaos ransomware a RaaS known for double-extortion tactics was a deliberate misdirection. MuddyWater’s true objective was data exfiltration and long-term persistence, not financial gain. Key attribution evidence included: - A code-signing certificate (Donald Gay, thumbprint B674578D4BDB24CD58BF2DC884EAA658B7AA250C) previously linked to MuddyWater’s Operation Olalampo (2026). - The C2 domain moonzonet[.]com, tied to prior MuddyWater activity targeting U.S. and MENA organizations. - Python-based process injection (pythonw.exe), a hallmark of the group’s toolkit. - Teams-based MFA harvesting, consistent with MuddyWater’s 2026 social engineering patterns. ### Impact & Targets The campaign primarily targeted Western organizations, including those in the U.S. and MENA region. By framing the attack as ransomware, MuddyWater diverted attention from its espionage objectives, allowing persistent access via DWAgent, AnyDesk, and the Game.exe RAT. Chaos ransomware, which emerged in 2025 as a successor to BlackSuit, has claimed 36 victims as of March 2026, predominantly in construction, manufacturing, and business services. MuddyWater’s adoption of this brand aligns with its 2025 use of Qilin RaaS in a similar false-flag operation. ### Key Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) - Initial access: Unsolicited Teams chats with screen-sharing requests. - Credential theft: credentials.txt or cred.txt files in user directories. - Persistence: Dual deployment of DWAgent + AnyDesk alongside RDP lateral movement. - C2 infrastructure: moonzonet[.]com, uploadfiler[.]com, adm-pulse[.]com.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
EspionageFalse Flag Ransomware
MOTIVATION
EspionageIntelligence Gathering
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Credentials, sensitive organizational dataDomain ControllersEndpoints with DWAgent/AnyDeskOperational Impact: Persistent remote access, data exfiltrationIdentity Theft Risk: High (PII exposure)
DATA BREACH
CredentialsOrganizational intelligenceSensitivity Of Data: High (PII, internal communications)Data Encryption: AES-256-GCM (for RAT configuration)credentials.txtcred.txt
FEBRUARY 2026
750Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
750Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
750Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
750Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
750Before Incident

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for Rapid7 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in June 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on Rapid7's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with Rapid7 ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view Rapid7's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?