Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » TelecomTV » TELGOO1772110899

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (TELGOO1772110899)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-20
Company Score Before Incident751 / 1000
Company Score After Incident731 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERTELGOO1772110899
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORMalware (GRIDTIDE) exploiting Google Sheets API
DATA EXPOSEDPersonally identifiable information (PII) such...
INCIDENT DATE25/02/2026
STATUSDisrupted

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of TelecomTV'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 TelecomTV 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 TelecomTV breach identified under incident ID TELGOO1772110899.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of TelecomTV's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/telecomtv, the number of followers: 18412, the industry type: Telecommunications and the number of employees: 23 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 751 and after the incident was 731 with a difference of -20 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 TelecomTV and their customers.

A newly reported cybersecurity incident, "Google Disrupts Major Chinese Cyber Espionage Campaign Targeting Global Telecom and Government Sectors", has drawn attention.

Google’s Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG), alongside Mandiant and other partners, recently dismantled a large-scale cyber espionage operation linked to the Chinese hacker group UNC2814.

The disruption is felt across the environment, and exposing Personally identifiable information (PII) such as names, phone numbers, and national ID numbers.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Terminated attacker-controlled Google Cloud Projects, disabled Google Sheets API infrastructure used for C2, blocked malicious traffic, and began remediation that includes Released Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) including malicious domains and IP addresses.

The case underscores how Disrupted, teams are taking away lessons such as The incident underscores the increasing complexity of defending against advanced persistent threats (APTs), particularly as attackers exploit legitimate cloud services to bypass traditional security measures.

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 Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating targeted 53 victims across 42 countries, telecom and government and Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (T1195.002) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating exploited legitimate Google Sheets API for C2. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell (T1059.003) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE malware executed operations via Google Sheets API and User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE provided persistent access to compromised systems. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Account Manipulation (T1098) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE provided persistent access to compromised systems and Event Triggered Execution: Installer Packages (T1546.016) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating malware exploited Google Sheets API for C2 communications. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating embedded malicious activity within legitimate API traffic, Subvert Trust Controls: Install Root Certificate (T1553.004) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE used cryptographic keys to send commands via Google Sheets, and Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exploited Google Sheets API for C2 to evade detection. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (T1552.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating pII such as names, phone numbers, national ID numbers compromised and Adversary-in-the-Middle (T1557) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE maintained control and executed further operations. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery: Domain Account (T1087.002) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating targeted telecom and government organizations for intelligence and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE exfiltrated sensitive data including PII. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating pII such as names, phone numbers, national ID numbers compromised and Automated Collection (T1119) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE malware exfiltrated sensitive data via Google Sheets API. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Web Service: Bidirectional Communication (T1102.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE exploited Google Sheets API for C2 communications and Application Layer Protocol: DNS (T1071.004) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating malicious domains and IP addresses used as IOCs. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE exfiltrated sensitive data via Google Sheets API and Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating embedded malicious activity within legitimate API traffic. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating campaign focused on intelligence collection and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating gRIDTIDE provided persistent access to compromised systems. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Exploit Public-Facing Application (40%)
Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (30%)
Execution
Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell (60%)
User Execution: Malicious File (50%)
Persistence
Account Manipulation (70%)
Event Triggered Execution: Installer Packages (50%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (80%)
Subvert Trust Controls: Install Root Certificate (60%)
Masquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (90%)
Credential Access
Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (50%)
Adversary-in-the-Middle (40%)
Discovery
Account Discovery: Domain Account (60%)
File and Directory Discovery (50%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Automated Collection (70%)
Command and Control
Web Service: Bidirectional Communication (90%)
Application Layer Protocol: DNS (40%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (80%)
Impact
Defacement: Internal Defacement (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)

Sources & References