Motive
Boundary Testing
Coercion
Conflicts of Interest
Curiosity
Espionage
Fear of Reprisals
Hubris
Human Error
Ideology
Joiner
Lack of Awareness
Leaver
Misapprehension or Delusion
Mover
Personal Gain
Political or Philosophical Beliefs
Recklessness
Recognition
Resentment
Revenge
Rogue Nationalism
Self Sabotage
Third Party Collusion Motivated by Personal Gain
- ID: MT012
- Created: 22nd May 2024
- Updated: 25th April 2025
- Contributor: The ITM Team
Coercion
A subject is persuaded against their will to access and exfiltrate or destroy sensitive data, or conduct some other act that harms or undermines the target organization.
Subsections (8)
| ID | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| MT012.004 | Emotional Vulnerability | A subject’s emotional state is exploited by a malicious third party, particularly during periods of heightened stress, grief, or personal hardship. The third party leverages this vulnerability to manipulate the subject into revealing sensitive information or performing actions that could compromise the organization. |
| MT012.006 | Long-Term Relationship Building | A malicious third party gradually builds a relationship with the subject over an extended period, slowly gaining their trust. This trust is then exploited to access sensitive information or systems, often without the knowledge of the subject. |
| MT012.002 | Non-Violent Threats and Intimidation | The subject acts under coercion stemming from threats that target reputation, professional standing, financial stability, or exposure of personal secrets. These threats may be digitally delivered. While these actions stop short of threatening physical harm, they can exert intense psychological pressure, particularly when the subject believes their career, relationships, or public image are at imminent risk.
This type of coercion may originate from:
Unlike ideological motivation or personal gain, this behavior is driven by fear of exposure or ruin, not alignment with the threat actor’s objectives. Subjects may act reluctantly, leave minimal technical traces of coordination, and revert to baseline behavior once the coercive force is removed. |
| MT012.003 | Psychological Manipulation | A third party uses deception, exploitation, or other unethical methods to psychologically manipulate a subject over time, with the intent to influence their perceptions, actions, and decisions. This manipulation can lead the subject to, knowingly or unknowingly, act against the organization’s interests. |
| MT012.005 | Romantic Seduction | A malicious third party employs romantic interest or seduction as a manipulation tactic. Through emotional and psychological engagement, the third party persuades the subject to reveal confidential information, grant access to restricted resources, or carry out actions detrimental to the organization. |
| MT012.007 | Sexual Extortion | A subject is extorted by a third party threatening to expose sexual or indecent images connected to them, a tactic commonly referred to as sextortion. These images may be real, obtained by a third party, AI-generated ‘deep fake’ images resembling the subject, or entirely fabricated claims. The extortion is typically financially motivated, which can drive the subject to harm the organization for personal gain. Alternatively, the third party may coerce the subject into compromising the organization by revealing sensitive information or granting unauthorized access. |
| MT012.001 | Social Engineering (Inbound) | A third party deceptively manipulates and/or persuades a subject to divulge information, or gain access to devices or systems, or to otherwise cause harm or undermine a target organization. |
| MT012.008 | Threats of Violence or Physical Harm | The subject is coerced by a third party into harmful or otherwise policy-violating activity through explicit or credible threats of violence, either directed at themselves or at others (e.g., family members, colleagues). This type of coercion often includes real-world intimidation, such as direct verbal or written threats, or more ambiguous references that imply the actor possesses the means or knowledge to inflict physical harm.
Examples may include:
In some cases, the coercive actor may belong to or adopt the tactics and posture of organized crime groups or hybrid cyber-physical groups, lending credibility to the threat. The subject’s response may be reluctant, sudden, and inconsistent with previous behavior, reflecting actions taken under acute psychological and physical duress.
This motive reflects extreme coercion and requires careful investigative sensitivity. It may also intersect with criminal law, necessitating immediate coordination with internal legal teams, law enforcement, and/or protective services. In almost all such cases, the organization has a duty to treat the subject as a victim of crime. |