Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Xsolis » XSOHONADVMAY1780958028

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (XSOHONADVMAY1780958028)

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

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-58
Company Score Before Incident636 / 1000
Company Score After Incident578 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERXSOHONADVMAY1780958028
Type of Cyber IncidentBreach
ATTACK VECTORPhishing
DATA EXPOSEDSensitive patient information, including names,...
INCIDENT DATE19/01/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Xsolis'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 Xsolis 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 Xsolis breach identified under incident ID XSOHONADVMAY1780958028.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Xsolis's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/xsolis, the number of followers: 7739, the industry type: Hospitals and Health Care and the number of employees: 243 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 636 and after the incident was 578 with a difference of -58 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 Xsolis and their customers.

On 22 January 2026, Xsolis disclosed Data Breach issues under the banner "Xsolis Healthcare AI Platform Hit by Phishing Attack, Exposing Sensitive Patient Data".

On January 22, 2026, Xsolis detected unauthorized activity on its network stemming from a phishing attack that occurred two days prior.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Xsolis Dragonfly AI platform, and exposing Sensitive patient information, including names, addresses, dates of birth, health insurance details, Social Security numbers, and medical treatment records.

In response, and stakeholders are being briefed through Notifying affected individuals via mail.

The case underscores how Ongoing, with advisories going out to stakeholders covering Notifying affected individuals via mail.

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 (95%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized activity on its network stemming from a phishing attack, Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (T1566.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating phishing attack that occurred two days prior, and Phishing: Spearphishing Link (T1566.002) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating phishing attack targeting healthcare infrastructure. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Brute Force (T1110) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating unauthorized activity on its network (implied credential misuse) and Credentials from Password Stores (T1555) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating compromised files containing highly sensitive patient information. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating compromised files containing names, addresses, SSNs, medical records and Data from Information Repositories (T1213) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating dragonfly platform manages vast amounts of protected health info. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating highly sensitive patient information was compromised and Transfer Data to Cloud Account (T1537) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating aI-driven platform may have cloud-based data storage. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (30%), supported by evidence indicating no details on attacker’s identity or breach extent and Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (T1565.001) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating aI-driven case management services may involve data integrity risks. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Phishing (95%)
Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment (70%)
Phishing: Spearphishing Link (70%)
Credential Access
Brute Force (50%)
Credentials from Password Stores (60%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Data from Information Repositories (80%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (80%)
Transfer Data to Cloud Account (50%)
Impact
Data Destruction (30%)
Data Manipulation: Stored Data Manipulation (40%)