Brain Cipher claims Deloitte data theft; Deloitte denies
The ransomware group Brain Cipher claimed to have stolen data from Deloitte. In response, Deloitte denied claims that its systems had been hacked.
Key facts
- Affected organisation
- Deloitte
- Incident type
- Ransomware
- Occurred / detected
- Not confirmed
- Scale of damage
- Not confirmed
- Cause / method
- Not confirmed
- Location
- United Kingdom
Timeline
- Claims of a ransomware attack targeting Deloitte surfaced.
- Deloitte denied that its systems had been hacked in response to Brain Cipher's data theft claims.
Also affected by this incident
Rhode Island welfare system hack affects 657,000 people
↳ Knock-on damage from the Deloitte incident · View original incident657kImpact: Personal data of 657,000 people and public welfare system outage
RIBridges, the public welfare system of the US state of Rhode Island, was hit by a cyber-attack that took it offline and leaked residents' personal data. The ransomware group Brain Cipher published the stolen data, and efforts were underway to notify 657,000 victims. The state government moved to bring the system back online and later announced a $7 million settlement with contractor Deloitte.
Related reports: 14 · last report →
3 related reports
Other incidents at Deloitte
Deloitte source code and GitHub credentials allegedly leaked
Impact: Alleged leak of source code and GitHub credentials
Allegations have surfaced that Deloitte's source code and GitHub credentials were leaked. Whether a leak actually took place, when it happened and how the firm responded have not been confirmed.
Read on CyberSecurityNews ↗Claim of Deloitte internal communications leak
↳ Knock-on damage from the Experience Engine incident · View original incidentThreat actor IntelBroker claimed to have leaked Deloitte's internal communications. Whether a leak actually took place, its scale, when it happened and any response have not been confirmed.
Related reports: 2 · last report →
The summary and key facts are written by AI from related reports and may contain errors. Check the original articles and the organisation’s official statements for accurate details.