PSGourmet Pte Ltd
bd_9344e0591fbe4e81 · schema v1 · pii pii-v1
Regulator's decision — not a breach notification
This record is a regulator's decision, not the organisation's own breach notice. Breach-notification fields (discovery date, notification clock) are structurally absent — what this source establishes is the outcome and the provisions the decision cites.
Background PSGourmet Pte. Ltd. (the “ Organisation ”) notified the Personal Data Protection Commission (the “ Commission ”) on 26 June 2025 of a ransomware incident, involving the personal data of (current and former) employees and non-corporate customers (the “ Incident ”). Investigations revealed that the threat actor had gained initial unauthorised access to the Organisation’s internal network using compromised login credentials for a dormant account via Virtual Private Network (“ VPN ”) which subsequently resulted in ransomware deployment and exfiltration of personal data. The personal data of an estimated 3,122 individuals were affected. There was no evidence that the exfiltrated personal data was published. The types of personal data affected included names, addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, NRIC numbers and financial information of bank account numbers and salary / CPF payments. Upon discovery of the Incident, the Organisation took prompt remedial actions which included blocking inbound and outbound network traffic on the Organisation’s firewall, except for known good IP addresses and domains until confidence in the network’s security had been achieved, disabling VPN access and resetting all local VPN accounts to prevent further unauthorised entry during remediation efforts, and ensuring multi-factor authentication (“ MFA ”) was enforced for VPN users. The Organisation also notified the affected individuals. The Incident had likely occurred as among other weaknesses: there was no MFA for the Organisation’s VPN, Endpoint Detection and Response (“ EDR ”) was not deployed on affected servers, a dormant account was not removed, and there was a lack of network segmentation. Voluntary Undertaking Having considered the circumstances of the case, the Commission accepted a voluntary undertaking (the “ Undertaking ”) from the Organisation to
P pin to compareR raw source
Incident timeline — partial
? — ?
Breach window unknown
Jun 5, 2026
Filed
—
No linked breach filing · watching
Compliance clocks stay unassessable until a breach filing is linked. This record is the regulator's action, not a breach notice. Dashed segments fill in automatically when corroboration arrives.
Evidence ladder
Attacker assertion only. Establishes: claim date, group, alleged victim.
Unlocks: incident narrative, operational impact. Still no compliance clock.
Unlocks: discovery date, data types, affected count, compliance clock.
Unlocks: materiality, stated response, full audit trail. Ceiling removed.
Source ceiling
- outcome + obligations
- fine (SGD) and affected count where a grounds document states them
- discovery date
- notification clock
See the underlying breach notice, if any.