Hot Line Construction reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2019-04-24. The breach occurred from 10/25/2018 to 11/30/2018. 25 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 25
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filed Apr 24, 2019. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_d4dd61cd106a4197 · 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
Oct 25, 2018
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Dec 31, 2018
Reported by CALIFORNIA AG filing
Hot Line Construction reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2019-04-24. The breach occurred from 10/25/2018 to 11/30/2018. 25 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 25
Hot Line Construction, Inc. reported a data breach affecting approximately 2,093 California residents. Unauthorized access to employee email accounts occurred between October 25, 2018, and November 30, 2018. The accessed emails contained names, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, and financial account numbers. The company reset passwords, engaged forensic experts, and provided 24 months of credit monitoring via Kroll.
Affected (this filing): 2,093
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.