DDoSecrets publishes records of 41,000 DHS personnel, including undercover links
Original title: Hackers Leak Records of 41,000 DHS Personnel, Exposing Undercover ICE Agents
The Icepick archive, last updated August 19, lists emails, phones, supervisors, and more than 55,000 permission groups across seven DHS components.
Distributed Denial of Secrets published the Icepick archive on October 28, covering more than 41,000 DHS employees and contractors. Files include names, emails, phones, titles, supervisors, and permission groups spanning ICE, CBP, CISA, and other components. DDoSecrets credits a group calling itself Department of Peace and says the data came from an Okta single sign-on service. Reuters verified only a small sample; Okta reports no evidence of compromise, and no entry method is confirmed.
Unconfirmed: DDoSecrets says the data came from DHS Okta SSO; Reuters could not confirm, and Okta denies a compromise.
- CBP accounts for more than half of the records; roughly 10,000 relate to ICE.
- About 6,200 records cover USCIS, and nearly 1,000 concern CISA.
- WIRED found 39 HSI employees in groups containing “CUC,” linked to undercover work.
- The collection is about one seventh of the department’s workforce.
- Reuters matched six employees and confirmed phones by calling three workers.
Impact: DHS staff contacts, assignments, and undercover-linked groups exposed
- Vendors
- Okta
- Threat actors
- Department of Peace
- Organizations
- Distributed Denial of Secrets
- Countries
- United States
From the original article
2 min read at cybersecuritynews.com
A leak of records covering more than 41,000 Department of Homeland Security employees and contractors has exposed contact details, work assignments, and links to sensitive operations, including undercover ICE work. Published on October 28, the archive reveals far more than a staff directory, offering a view of internal teams and reporting lines. Distributed Denial of […]
By Guru Baran · cybersecuritynews.com
A short excerpt; the article and its images belong to the publisher. Summary, key facts and assessment above are AI-written from the article and can be wrong.