Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign » INSUNI1778215270

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (INSUNI1778215270)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-31
Company Score Before Incident811 / 1000
Company Score After Incident780 / 1000
Company LinkView University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Profile
INCIDENT NUMBERINSUNI1778215270
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORNA
DATA EXPOSEDNames, email addresses, student ID...
INCIDENT DATE05/04/1906
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign'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 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 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 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign breach identified under incident ID INSUNI1778215270.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/university-of-illinois-urbana-champaign, the number of followers: 629466, the industry type: Higher Education and the number of employees: 24506 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 811 and after the incident was 780 with a difference of -31 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 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and their customers.

Instructure (Canvas) recently reported "Massive Cyberattack Disrupts U.S. Education Sector via Canvas LMS Breach", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A widespread cyberattack has disrupted universities and K-12 schools nationwide, targeting Instructure, the parent company of Canvas, a widely used learning management system (LMS).

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Canvas LMS, and exposing Names, email addresses, student ID numbers, private messages.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Temporarily disabling Canvas access.

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 Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating targeting Instructure, the parent company of Canvas, a widely used LMS and Trusted Relationship (T1199) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating supply chain such as true, third-party education platforms affected. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Steal Application Access Token (T1528) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating canvas LMS breach, private messages and student ID numbers exposed. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating names, email addresses, student ID numbers, and private messages exposed. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating shinyHunters threatening to release stolen data unless settlement and Exfiltration Over Web Service (T1567) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration such as Threatened by ShinyHunters. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating type such as Data Breach, Ransomware Threat and Defacement (T1491) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating temporary disabling of Canvas access, delayed exams. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating shinyHunters claimed responsibility, negotiation deadline set. 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 (70%)
Trusted Relationship (80%)
Credential Access
Steal Application Access Token (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Exfiltration Over Web Service (70%)
Impact
Data Encrypted for Impact (50%)
Defacement (40%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (60%)

Sources & References