Ursus Holdings reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2016-09-15. The breach occurred on 4/25/2016. 6 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 6
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Sep 15, 2016 → Sep 19, 2016. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_cea5ad19862a4b5c · 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.
CA MT
all State AG
Earliest sighting first · deep chronology in Litigation Timeline
Apr 25, 2016
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Apr 25, 2016
Reported by CALIFORNIA AG filing
Ursus Holdings reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2016-09-15. The breach occurred on 4/25/2016. 6 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 6
Ursus Holdings, LLC reported a data breach affecting employee email accounts. An employee received a phishing email with a malicious PDF attachment, providing credentials to the attacker. The attacker used these credentials to send blast emails to contacts. The breach potentially exposed PII including SSNs, bank account numbers, driver's license numbers, and credit card numbers stored in Google Mail/Docs. Ursus provided 12 months of identity repair and credit monitoring via AllClear ID.
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.