Cricut reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2017-10-05. The breach occurred from 5/27/2017 to 9/12/2017. 123 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 123
Clustered 2 filings across 2 jurisdictions · filing window Oct 5, 2017 → Oct 6, 2017. View entity profile → Other incidents for this victim →
incident inc_e2a0d253067d41a4 · 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
May 27, 2017
When the intrusion reportedly occurred, per the linked filings
Jul 12, 2017
Reported by CALIFORNIA AG filing
Cricut reported a data breach to the Montana Attorney General. The breach was reported on 2017-10-05. The breach occurred from 5/27/2017 to 9/12/2017. 123 Montana residents were affected.
Affected (this filing): 123
Provo Craft & Novelty, Inc. (d/b/a Cricut) disclosed a cyberattack on its shop.cricut.com checkout page between May 27 and July 12, 2017. Malware scraped customer payment card numbers, security codes, expiration dates, names, addresses, and contact information. The company engaged forensic experts, notified law enforcement, removed the malware, and relaunched the site with enhanced security. Affected customers were offered 12 months of free identity theft protection via ID Experts.
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.