Winona County reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2026-01-18 and was reported on 2026-05-07. 4 Indiana residents were affected. 6,196 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 6,196
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window May 7, 2026 → May 12, 2026. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_9f583714c5804c8e · 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 ME
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Jan 18, 2026
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Apr 16, 2026
Reported by MAINE AG filing
Winona County reported a data breach to the Indiana Attorney General. The breach occurred on 2026-01-18 and was reported on 2026-05-07. 4 Indiana residents were affected. 6,196 individuals affected in total.
Affected (this filing): 6,196
Winona County (MN) reported an external system breach (hacking) occurring between January 18-22, 2026, discovered on April 16, 2026. The incident affected 6,196 individuals, including one Maine resident. The breach involved the acquisition of personal identifiers and government-issued IDs. Winona County provided written notification on May 12, 2026, and offered 12 months of credit and cyber monitoring services through IDX.
Affected (this filing): 6,196
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.