The Kerner Group reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2025-09-13 and was reported on 2025-11-28. 1 Indiana residents were affected. 827 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 827
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Nov 28, 2025 → Dec 1, 2025. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_12ec399d4f3d43ab · merge_method deterministic · confidence 100%
Discovered → first regulatory filing
Time between earliest and latest filing
Not recorded for this incident
Discovery variance · Leak precedence · Materiality delta · SEC filing delay — no leak-site claim in this cluster; no SEC 8-K in this cluster; needs two dated filings.
IN NH
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Sep 13, 2025
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Sep 13, 2025
Reported by NEW HAMPSHIRE AG filing
The Kerner Group reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2025-09-13 and was reported on 2025-11-28. 1 Indiana residents were affected. 827 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 827
The Kerner Group, Inc. notified the New Hampshire Attorney General of a data event affecting one NH resident. Unauthorized access occurred between July 8 and September 13, 2025, involving file encryption and exfiltration of names, SSNs, driver's licenses, financial accounts, and passport numbers. Kerner engaged forensic specialists, secured systems, notified law enforcement, and provided one year of credit monitoring via Epiq.
Affected (this filing): 1
About this clustering
DisclosureLens links filings into incidents through layered matchers: deterministic rules (same source document, multistate filings of one breach, tight-window same-victim pairs), a weighted-similarity scorer for cross-source candidates, and an operator review queue for everything uncertain. Each link records its own method and confidence — shown per filing in the timeline below. The system defaults to NOT merging when uncertain, because a false merge (collapsing two unrelated breaches) is more harmful than a false split (showing related filings separately); uncertain pairs route to human review instead of auto-merging. Filing summaries shown in the timeline are AI-generated extracts — verify each against its linked source.