Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Atlantic Group » GREHACRWJTHE1783635866

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (GREHACRWJTHE1783635866)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-79
Company Score Before Incident766 / 1000
Company Score After Incident687 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERGREHACRWJTHE1783635866
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORCompromised user account
DATA EXPOSEDProtected health information (PHI) including...
INCIDENT DATE26/11/2025
STATUSConcluded

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Atlantic Group'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 Atlantic Group 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 Atlantic Group breach identified under incident ID GREHACRWJTHE1783635866.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Atlantic Group's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-atlantic-group, the number of followers: 382685, the industry type: Staffing and Recruiting and the number of employees: 279 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 766 and after the incident was 687 with a difference of -79 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 Atlantic Group and their customers.

On 18 May 2026, Greenbaum Rowe Smith and Davis disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Cyberattack on New Jersey Law Firm Exposes Nearly 13,000 Patients’ Sensitive Data".

A cyberattack on New Jersey-based law firm Greenbaum Rowe Smith and Davis compromised the protected health information (PHI) of 12,801 individuals, including patients from major healthcare providers.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Law firm's systems, and exposing Protected health information (PHI) including names, addresses, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, medical records, and health insurance details, with nearly 12,801 records at risk.

In response, teams activated the incident response plan, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Password reset for compromised accounts, and began remediation that includes Strengthened cybersecurity measures, while recovery efforts such as Offering identity theft protection services and dedicated call center for impacted individuals continue, and stakeholders are being briefed through Mailed letters to affected individuals, public disclosure via HHS OCR.

The case underscores how Concluded, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Coordination with affected healthcare providers (e.g., Hackensack Meridian Health).

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 Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access to the firm’s systems via a compromised user account. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised user account and Cloud Secrets Management Stores (T1552.006) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating access to sensitive data including SSNs, medical records, and health insurance details. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating acquired sensitive data, including names, addresses, SSNs, medical records and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating protected health information (PHI) of 12,801 individuals compromised. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized third party accessed and acquired sensitive data and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating data breach involving PHI and PII. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no evidence the stolen data has been misused or published and Data Manipulation: Transmitted Data Manipulation (T1565.002) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating high identity theft risk due to exposure of SSNs and PII. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized access via compromised user account and Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating breach detected on November 27, 2025, investigation concluded on April 15. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Valid Accounts (90%)
Credential Access
Valid Accounts (90%)
Cloud Secrets Management Stores (50%)
Collection
Data from Local System (80%)
Data from Information Repositories (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (70%)
Transfer Data to Cloud Account (50%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Transmitted Data Manipulation (40%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts (80%)
Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (40%)