Skip to content
NewA calmer, faster ZeroHour
Data breachhighExploited in the wild

Revolut Data Breach: 5 Months, 680 High-Profile Accounts, $3M Ransom

SecurityWeekby Ionut Arghire ()2 min read6
AI summary · glm-5.3-flashSummaries by Vani AI

A threat actor demanding $3 million from Revolut says fake government legal requests yielded data of about 680 customers, mostly cryptocurrency whales.

Hackers used an infostealer-compromised government employee's email account to send fraudulent legal requests to Revolut Bank UAB in Lithuania for roughly five months, obtaining personal and financial data. Threat actor 'IAmNotAVillain' publicly demanded $3 million, though Revolut says it received no direct demand; the compromised data of approximately 680 high-profile customers, reportedly crypto whales, includes passports, phone numbers, and financial information. The actor also claims the theft of over 147GB of data from Italy's Interior Ministry (pec.interno.it), which is under police investigation. Hudson Rock says it knows of more than 300 compromised credentials tied to pec.interno.it, suggesting existing infostealer logs were used rather than fresh infections.

Key facts
  • Threat actor 'IAmNotAVillain' publicly demanded $3 million from Revolut
  • About 680 customers, reportedly crypto whales, had data exposed
  • Campaign used fake government legal requests for roughly five months
  • Access relied on an infostealer-compromised government email account
  • Hackers also claim 147GB theft from Italian law enforcement
Analyze this story with Vani AIImpact, who is affected and what defenders should do, in a new chat

From the original article

2 min read at securityweek.com

Revolut allegedly fed customer information to hackers impersonating an Italian government agency for five months. The post Revolut Data Breach: 5 Months, 680 High-Profile Accounts, $3M Ransom appeared first on SecurityWeek.

SecurityWeek

By Ionut Arghire · securityweek.com

Read the full article at SecurityWeek

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.