Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » SolarWinds » 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 Impact-41
Company Score Before Incident649 / 1000
Company Score After Incident608 / 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 SolarWinds'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 SolarWinds 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 SolarWinds breach identified under incident ID DAVCAECHAPOWKASFILMARSOLNAS1770898846.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of SolarWinds's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/solarwinds, the number of followers: 294900, the industry type: Software Development and the number of employees: 2823 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 649 and after the incident was 608 with a difference of -41 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 SolarWinds 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, and 2023 MoveIt Transfer breach (Clop ransomware gang), Phishing (T1566) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including phishing remains a primary infection vector, and phishing & AI-Driven Attacks, Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting Unpatched Systems – Known flaws in outdated software, and Drive-by Compromise (T1189) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating aI-Driven Attacks – Attack automation and reconnaissance. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating phishing remains a primary infection vector 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. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Create Account (T1136) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating supply chain attacks compromise downstream victims and Create or Modify System Process (T1543) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware strains like LockBit 5.0 use private negotiation portals. 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. 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 encrypt data (e.g., Medusa, Clop) and Impair Defenses (T1562) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating aI-driven attacks enhance social engineering and automation. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Adversary-in-the-Middle (T1557) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating phishing remains a primary infection vector and Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting known flaws in outdated software. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating high-value targets in supply chain attacks (e.g., PowerSchool, Change Healthcare) and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration (e.g., 1TB of data stolen from NASCAR). Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 62M student records, 193M victims (Change Healthcare) and Data Staged (T1074) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration confirmed in multiple incidents. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating lockBit 5.0 uses private negotiation portals for extortion and Ingress Tool Transfer (T1105) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) tools and infrastructure. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 1TB of data stolen (NASCAR), 193M victims (Change Healthcare) and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating triple extortion tactics (e.g., Vice Society, LockBit 5.0). Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware strains encrypt data (e.g., Medusa, Clop, LockBit 5.0), Defacement (T1491) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating operational disruptions (e.g., Marks & Spencer profit drop), and Service Stop (T1489) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating disrupted loan services (LoanDepot), casino operations (MGM Resorts). 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
Create Account (60%)
Create or Modify System Process (50%)
Privilege Escalation
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (70%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (80%)
Impair Defenses (60%)
Credential Access
Adversary-in-the-Middle (60%)
Brute Force (50%)
Discovery
Account Discovery (70%)
File and Directory Discovery (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data Staged (80%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (70%)
Ingress Tool Transfer (60%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (90%)
Defacement (50%)
Service Stop (70%)