LexisNexis Breach Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (LEX1772641919)

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the LexisNexis breach identified under incident ID LEX1772641919.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of LexisNexis's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexisnexis, the number of followers: 391074, the industry type: IT Services and IT Consulting and the number of employees: 10705 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 780 and after the incident was 710 with a difference of -70 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 LexisNexis and their customers.

LexisNexis recently reported "LexisNexis Data Breach: Hackers Claim Far Greater Access Than Company Admits", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

Cybersecurity researchers uncovered a data breach at LexisNexis, with hackers alleging far more extensive access than the company acknowledged.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Redshift databases, VPC databases and AWS Secrets Manager, and exposing 2GB of stolen files, including database tables, AWS Secrets Manager credentials, employee password hashes, and millions of records, with nearly Millions of records (including ~400,000 cloud user profiles) records at risk.

In response, moved swiftly to contain the threat with measures like Attack contained (per company statement), and stakeholders are being briefed through Public statement downplaying severity.

The case underscores how Contained (per company statement).

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.

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 high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exploited an unpatched React frontend application using React2Shell. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating open-source post-exploitation tool React2Shell used. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (T1552.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating plaintext AWS Secrets Manager credentials exposed and OS Credential Dumping (T1003) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating employee password hashes compromised. Under the Discovery tactic, the analysis identified Account Discovery (T1087) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating details of over 100 government users and 400,000 cloud user profiles exposed and File and Directory Discovery (T1083) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating hundreds of Redshift and VPC database tables accessed. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating 2GB of stolen files including database tables and user profiles. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating 2GB of files leaked on underground forums. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with lower confidence (40%), supported by evidence indicating company downplayed severity, but hackers claimed extensive access. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.