Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » U.S. Department of the Treasury » FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-102
Company Score Before Incident584 / 1000
Company Score After Incident482 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERFBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORPhishing, Social Engineering, Exploiting Exposed Operational Technology
DATA EXPOSEDGovernment data, corporate data, personally...
INCIDENT DATE31/01/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of U.S. Department of the Treasury'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 U.S. Department of the Treasury 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 U.S. Department of the Treasury breach identified under incident ID FBIOFFUS-CEN1787682734.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of U.S. Department of the Treasury's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/us-treasury, the number of followers: 155402, the industry type: Government Administration and the number of employees: 14483 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 584 and after the incident was 482 with a difference of -102 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 U.S. Department of the Treasury and their customers.

U.S. government offices recently reported "Operation Economic Outcast: U.S. Treasury Sanctions Iranian Cyber Actors", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

The U.S.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Energy companies, Defense contractors and Healthcare institutions, and exposing Government data, corporate data, personally identifiable information, plus an estimated financial loss of $17 million (cryptocurrency theft).

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering U.S. Treasury sanctions, Rewards for Justice program ($10 million for information on cyber threats).

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 attack vector such as Phishing, Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting Exposed Operational Technology, and Trusted Relationship (T1199) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating iRGC-affiliated groups targeting critical infrastructure. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified User Execution (T1204) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating social Engineering as attack vector. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Create Account (T1136) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating state-sponsored actors with long-term access. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts (T1078) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating compromised critical infrastructure systems. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (T1078.004) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from U.S. government offices and Hide Artifacts (T1564) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating cryptocurrency theft via 30 wallets since 2018. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating social Engineering and phishing attacks and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating compromised critical infrastructure systems. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from government and corporate systems and Network Service Scanning (T1046) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating exploiting exposed operational technology. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating government data, corporate data, PII compromised and Automated Collection (T1119) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from multiple sectors. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol (T1071) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating state-sponsored cyber operations and Proxy (T1090) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating cryptocurrency transactions via front companies. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating data exfiltration from U.S. government offices and Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (T1048) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating cryptocurrency theft ($17M across 30 wallets). Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating four-day shutdown of a U.K. power plant, Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware listed as attack type, and Data Manipulation (T1565) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating disruptions to water and wastewater utilities. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing (90%)
Exploit Public-Facing Application (80%)
Trusted Relationship (70%)
Execution
User Execution (80%)
Persistence
Create Account (60%)
Privilege Escalation
Valid Accounts (80%)
Defense Evasion
Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts (70%)
Hide Artifacts (60%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (70%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Discovery
File and Directory Discovery (80%)
Network Service Scanning (70%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Automated Collection (70%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol (80%)
Proxy (70%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol (80%)
Impact
Endpoint Denial of Service (80%)
Data Encrypted for Impact (60%)
Data Manipulation (50%)

Sources & References