[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$f1vkxcbyxj9z1n":3},{"success":4,"breach":5},true,{"_id":6,"name":7,"title":8,"slug":7,"domain":9,"breachDate":10,"addedDate":11,"publishedAt":12,"modifiedDate":13,"contentUpdatedAt":14,"source":15,"sourceUrl":16,"sourceUrls":17,"pwnCount":18,"affectedCount":18,"affectedCountStatus":19,"affectedCountLowerBound":12,"affectedCountUnit":20,"hasEnglishDescription":4,"contentLocale":21,"availableLocales":22,"translations":24,"severity":27,"dataClasses":28,"description":34,"seoTitle":35,"seoDescription":36,"logoUrl":37,"isVerified":38,"isSensitive":4,"isSpamList":38,"isMalware":38,"company":39},"6a454e8ba91e0437a6ce5f47","mefeedia","Mefeedia Alleged Data Exposure","mefeedia.com","2019-09-01T00:00:00.000Z","2026-07-01T17:29:44.542Z",null,"2026-09-17T16:27:41.515Z","2026-07-19T00:03:52.290Z","Third party breach","https:\u002F\u002Fnightlion.com\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2020\u002F12\u002FTHE-HACK-OF-NIGHT-LION-SECURITY.pdf",[16],1671482,"known","email_identifiers","en",[21,23],"tr",{"en":25,"tr":26},{"slug":7},{"slug":7},"Critical",[29,30,31,32,33],"Email addresses","IP addresses","Passwords","Physical addresses","Usernames","\u003Cp>The Mefeedia data breach record is a security incident that came to light in September 2019 and is associated with approximately 1.67 million records. The record, linked to the video discovery and content aggregation platform, includes user account, IP, address, and password fields. This explanation has been prepared to clarify which data fields may be at risk, the scope of verification of the incident, and the applicable security measures.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The risk of the platform being old or having low activity does not go away; password, IP, and physical address fields can still be misused even after a long time. Only data classes compatible with the available records have been used in the text; unverified technical details, different events, or services with similar names are not presented as definite information under this record. This way, the user can see the real risks without exaggeration but without leaving anything out.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Leaking Data Types and Risks\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>The types of data listed in this record are: email addresses, IP addresses, passwords, physical addresses, and usernames. Physical address and IP information, when combined with username and email, increase the risk of identity association. When these fields are used together, fake notifications, account recovery, targeted searches, identity association, or fraud attempts can become more convincing.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>Since the password field is listed, users need to check whether they have used the same password on other services. Even in records without a password, fields such as phone, address, IP, device information, business profile, membership, or physical location can alone pose a significant risk. If there is a password or password-like field, it should also be checked whether the same information is repeated on different services.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Verified Scope and Boundaries\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>The record is limited to approximately 1.67 million records associated with the domain name mefeedia.com. The event is in the unverified record class. The scope has been written by evaluating the domain name, industry, country, number of accounts, data classes, and the possibility of overlap with similar events separately. Data types not listed have not been presented to the user as if they exist.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>The event has not been written as a definite company statement because there is no confirmation from a strong institution. In records with verification limits, the text has not been established as a definite company statement. In records that may be duplicate or resemble a sub-event of another brand, this distinction is indirectly shown to the user and data fields are not unnecessarily expanded.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>User Groups at Risk\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>Mefeedia users, people who use the same password on old video platform accounts, and accounts with an address field are at risk. The main risk for these people is that the leaked fields are matched with information used on other accounts. If the same email, phone, username, IP, address, social profile, or password is repeated on different accounts, the attack surface increases.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>Old media accounts can be used in fake account recovery, password reset, or profile verification messages. Media, real estate, telecommunications, logistics, gaming, video, Discord services, dating platforms, and professional data contexts pose different risks. The user should consider not only the data fields but also which service context these fields are associated with.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Urgent Measures to Be Taken\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>Affected users should change all accounts where they use the same password and check their email sessions. If a password or password-like field is listed, users should make changes on all accounts where they use the same or similar password, use a unique password, and enable multi-factor authentication where possible. The email account should also be checked.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>In records containing phone, address, location, IP, device, work profile, billing, contract, or platform ID, users should check account recovery options, session history, forwarding rules, and suspicious messages. In corporate accounts, this information should be shared with the security team.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Long-Term Security Strategies\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>Old media and forum accounts should be closed, and profile and address information on unused services should be deleted. In the long term, password managers, unique passwords, multi-factor authentication, closing old accounts, and deleting unnecessary profile fields are fundamental defenses. Since permanent personal data cannot be retrieved, account behavior and verification processes should be strengthened.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>From the perspective of institutions, these events show that data minimization, third-party access, retention period of customer records, employee documents, and incident notification processes need to be regularly audited. On the user side, not repeating the same identity information across different services reduces persistent risk.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2>Record Control and User Action\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp>If the user matches this record, they should check whether their old Mefeedia password is still being used on other accounts. If a match is seen, the user should first read which data fields are listed and then prioritize the steps accordingly. If there is a password, password change should be prioritized; if there is an address or phone, a fraud alert should be prioritized; if there is an IP or device, session control should be prioritized; if there is a sensitive membership, privacy control should be prioritized.\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>Final assessment: Although this record has not been verified, it has been classified as sensitive due to the password, IP, and physical address fields. The user should compare this record with their own account history; they should individually check the services where they have used the same email, phone, username, IP, address, or password. Any suspicious call, email, message, or account recovery notification should be considered higher risk after the incident.\u003C\u002Fp>","Mefeedia Alleged Data Exposure (1.7 Million Email Identifiers)","Mefeedia Alleged Data Exposure. 1.7 Million email identifiers are reported. Reported data: Email addresses, IP addresses, Passwords. Review the scope, risks…","\u002Fuploads\u002Flogo\u002Fmefeedia_com.png",false,{"name":40,"sector":41,"country":42,"website":9,"websiteArchiveUrl":43,"websiteStatus":43,"websiteCheckedAt":12},"Mefeedia","Video Discovery \u002F Entertainment","United States",""]