State AG filing for VALIC Retirement Services Company in New Hampshire. The attachment content is empty; no breach details, dates, or data types were extracted from the provided source.
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filed Jul 31, 2023. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_4c900c46dedc4b46 · 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.
Identity (basic) · Government ID
ME NH
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
May 29, 2023 → May 30, 2023
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Jun 26, 2023
Reported by MAINE AG filing
State AG filing for VALIC Retirement Services Company in New Hampshire. The attachment content is empty; no breach details, dates, or data types were extracted from the provided source.
VALIC Retirement Services Company (VRSCO) reported a data breach affecting 2,722 Maine residents. The breach was attributed to an incident at a third-party service provider that occurred between May 29, 2023, and May 30, 2023. The company discovered the breach on June 26, 2023. The compromised information includes names and Social Security numbers. VRSCO began notifying affected individuals on July 27, 2023, and offered 24 months of complimentary credit monitoring, fraud consultation, and identity restoration services through Kroll.
Affected (this filing): 2,722
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.