Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Thames Water » THA1774745423

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (THA1774745423)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-4
Company Score Before Incident771 / 1000
Company Score After Incident767 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERTHA1774745423
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDNA
INCIDENT DATE17/11/2024
STATUSOngoing regulatory scrutiny; partial disruptions reported but not confirmed by the company

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Thames Water's Vulnerability 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 Thames Water 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 Thames Water breach identified under incident ID THA1774745423.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Thames Water's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/thames-water, the number of followers: 105269, the industry type: Utilities and the number of employees: 6612 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 771 and after the incident was 767 with a difference of -4 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 Thames Water and their customers.

Thames Water recently reported "Thames Water’s Aging IT Infrastructure Exposes Critical Cybersecurity Risks", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Thames Water, the UK’s largest water and waste treatment provider, is grappling with severe vulnerabilities in its IT infrastructure, leaving it exposed to cyber threats.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Water and waste treatment operations, IT infrastructure.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Denied experiencing any cyberattacks despite insider reports.

The case underscores how Ongoing regulatory scrutiny; partial disruptions reported but not confirmed by the company, teams are taking away lessons such as Aging IT infrastructure and underinvestment in critical national infrastructure pose significant cybersecurity risks. Physical and digital security gaps must be addressed to prevent disruptions to essential services, and recommending next steps like Upgrade outdated IT systems, implement robust cybersecurity protocols, enhance physical security measures, and allocate sufficient funding for asset upgrades and monitoring, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has warned of heightened threats to the UK’s water sector.

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 moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating relies on outdated systems some dating back to the 1980s including obsolete Lotus Notes and External Remote Services (T1133) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating state-linked cyber groups...have targeted Thames Water, with some attacks partially succeeding. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating contractors without clearance have reportedly accessed areas housing sensitive IT equipment. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Default Accounts (T1078.001) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating obsolete Lotus Notes software and 30-year-old hardware and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating inability to conduct essential security protocols like dark testing due to system instability. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating some attacks partially succeeding in disrupting operations and Resource Hijacking (T1496) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating aging systems and cyber threats intersect, leaving essential services vulnerable. Under the Reconnaissance tactic, the analysis identified Active Scanning (T1595) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating state-linked cyber groups from Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea have targeted Thames Water. 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 (60%)
External Remote Services (50%)
Persistence
Valid Accounts (40%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts: Default Accounts (50%)
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (70%)
Impact
Endpoint Denial of Service (60%)
Resource Hijacking (50%)
Reconnaissance
Active Scanning (80%)

Sources & References