Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Spectrum » SPE1780439851

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (SPE1780439851)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-74
Company Score Before Incident773 / 1000
Company Score After Incident699 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERSPE1780439851
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORVoice Phishing (Vishing)
DATA EXPOSED42 million records
INCIDENT DATE31/03/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Spectrum'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 Spectrum 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 Spectrum breach identified under incident ID SPE1780439851.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Spectrum's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/spectrum, the number of followers: 355351, the industry type: Telecommunications and the number of employees: 91051 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 773 and after the incident was 699 with a difference of -74 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 Spectrum and their customers.

Charter Communications (Spectrum) recently reported "Spectrum Data Breach Exposes 42 Million Records, Sparks Class-Action Lawsuits", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Charter Communications, the parent company of Spectrum, is facing multiple class-action lawsuits after a cyberattack in early April allegedly exposed over 42 million customer records containing sensitive personal information.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Salesforce instance, and exposing 42 million records, with nearly 42 million records at risk.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing.

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 Phishing: Vishing (T1566.004) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating gained access through a voice phishing (vishing) attack. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised an employee’s Microsoft Entra account and Brute Force: Password Guessing (T1110.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating vishing attack that compromised an employee’s account (implies weak credentials). Under the Lateral Movement tactic, the analysis identified Remote Services: Cloud Services (T1021.007) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrated millions of records from Charter’s Salesforce instance. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Information Repositories: Sharepoint (T1213.002) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) and support ticket data stolen and Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating 42 million records containing customer names, emails, phone numbers. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating hackers accessed and posted the stolen data on the dark web and Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from Salesforce instance by ShinyHunters. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating 42 million records exposed, risk of identity theft and fraud and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating customer support ticket data stolen (potential manipulation risk). Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (T1550.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised Microsoft Entra account used to access Salesforce. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing: Vishing (95%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (90%)
Brute Force: Password Guessing (50%)
Lateral Movement
Remote Services: Cloud Services (80%)
Collection
Data from Information Repositories: Sharepoint (70%)
Data from Local System (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (80%)
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)
Defense Evasion
Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token (80%)

Sources & References