Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filed Apr 3, 2026. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_befd107ea8b84f04 · merge_method deterministic · confidence 100%
Discovered → first regulatory filing
Range of discovered_at dates across filings
Identity (basic) · Government ID
Time between earliest and latest filing
Not recorded for this incident
Leak precedence · Materiality delta · SEC filing delay — no leak-site claim in this cluster; no SEC 8-K in this cluster.
NH VT
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Dec 19, 2024 → Dec 22, 2024
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Dec 19, 2024
Reported by VERMONT AG filing
Dec 22, 2024
Reported by NEW HAMPSHIRE AG filing
Graebel Companies, Inc. filed a supplemental notice with the Vermont AG regarding a December 2024 cybersecurity incident. The breach affected client data, including names and government IDs, impacting at least 4 Vermont residents. Graebel secured its network, engaged in investigation, notified federal law enforcement, and offered 24 months of credit monitoring via TransUnion.
Affected (this filing): 4
Graebel Companies, Inc. filed a supplemental notice with the New Hampshire Attorney General regarding a cybersecurity incident occurring between December 19 and 22, 2024. The incident involved unauthorized access to files containing client PII (names, addresses). Approximately 12 New Hampshire residents were notified. Graebel secured its network, engaged in an investigation, reported to federal law enforcement, and offered 24 months of credit monitoring via TransUnion.
Affected (this filing): 12
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.