Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (UNC1770223081)
The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.
Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis
Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis
- Timeline of UNC Health Southeastern'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 UNC Health Southeastern 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 UNC Health Southeastern breach identified under incident ID UNC1770223081.
The analysis begins with a detailed overview of UNC Health Southeastern's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/unc-health-southeastern, the number of followers: 888, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 266 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 764 and after the incident was 753 with a difference of -11 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 UNC Health Southeastern and their customers.
A newly reported cybersecurity incident, "HHS-OIG Audit Reveals Critical Web Application Security Gaps at Major U.S. Hospital", has drawn attention.
A recent audit by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) uncovered significant security vulnerabilities in internet-facing applications at a large Southeastern U.S.
The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Web applications and Account management systems, and exposing Potential access to device management controls and protected health information (PHI).
Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.
The case underscores how Audit completed, recommendations issued, teams are taking away lessons such as Healthcare organizations must strengthen UIA controls, evaluate WAFs for web applications, and expand vulnerability testing to include dynamic, static, and manual methods. Traditional network-focused controls are insufficient for securing cloud-based SaaS applications, and recommending next steps like Strengthen user identification and authentication (UIA) controls for the account management application, Regularly assess and update UIA controls across all systems and Evaluate all web applications for the need for automated protections like WAFs, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering HHS-OIG plans additional audits to identify systemic issues and improve guidance for healthcare providers.
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 (T1566) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 108 of 2,171 recipients (6%) clicked the malicious link in phishing simulation and Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including exploitable flaws in internet-facing applications, and injection attack vulnerability. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating hHS-OIG successfully obtained login credentials via phishing simulation and Valid Accounts (T1078) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised account allowed access to device management controls. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating injection attack vulnerability enabling manipulation of system commands. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised account lacked direct patient data but allowed device management access. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised account allowed disabling MFA and modifying account-linked devices. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating ability to disable multifactor authentication (MFA) via compromised account and Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating lack of input validation controls enabling code injection attacks. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating potential access to protected health information (PHI) and Medicare enrollee data. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating injection attack vulnerability could enable data exfiltration. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating ability to modify account-linked devices could disrupt operations and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating injection attack vulnerability could manipulate system commands. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.
Sources & References
- UNC Health Southeastern Rankiteo Cyber Incident Details: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/unc-health-southeastern/incident/UNC1770223081
- UNC Health Southeastern CyberSecurity Rating page: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/unc-health-southeastern
- UNC Health Southeastern Rankiteo Cyber Incident Blog Article: https://blog.rankiteo.com/unc1770223081-southeastern-us-hospital-vulnerability-february-2026/
- UNC Health Southeastern CyberSecurity Score History: https://www.rankiteo.com/company/unc-health-southeastern/history
- UNC Health Southeastern CyberSecurity Incident Source: https://www.hipaajournal.com/hhs-oig-web-application-security-weaknesses-audit-large-hospital/
- Rankiteo A.I CyberSecurity Rating methodology: https://www.rankiteo.com/Images/rankiteo_algo.pdf
- Rankiteo TPRM Scoring methodology: https://static.rankiteo.com/model/rankiteo_tprm_methodology.pdf