[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$f1ynbsjwnjrwpx":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":20,"affectedCount":20,"affectedCountStatus":21,"affectedCountLowerBound":12,"affectedCountUnit":22,"hasEnglishDescription":4,"contentLocale":23,"availableLocales":24,"translations":26,"severity":29,"dataClasses":30,"description":35,"seoTitle":36,"seoDescription":37,"logoUrl":38,"isVerified":4,"isSensitive":39,"isSpamList":39,"isMalware":39,"company":40},"6a459ab3bf20bd95c8ce5f48","rootkit","Rootkit Data Breach","rootkit.com","2011-02-06T00:00:00.000Z","2026-07-01T22:54:43.000Z",null,"2026-09-17T16:27:41.515Z","2026-07-19T00:06:13.867Z","Third party breach","https:\u002F\u002Fen.wikipedia.org\u002Fwiki\u002FHBGary#Anonymous_hack",[16,18,19],"https:\u002F\u002Fkrebsonsecurity.com\u002F2011\u002F02\u002Fanonymous-speaks-on-hbgary-hack\u002F","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.theguardian.com\u002Ftechnology\u002F2011\u002Ffeb\u002F07\u002Fanonymous-hbgary-hack",65825,"known","unknown","en",[23,25],"tr",{"en":27,"tr":28},{"slug":7},{"slug":7},"Medium",[31,32,33,34],"Email addresses","Usernames","IP addresses","Passwords","\u003Cp>The Rootkit data breach is a security incident dated February 2011 that occurred in the context of a security, rootkit, and hacking forum associated with the domain rootkit.com. This record has been maintained as a single incident affecting approximately \u003Cstrong>65,825\u003C\u002Fstrong> accounts. The supported data classes are limited to email addresses, usernames, IP addresses, and password information; unverified additional claims have not been added to this record to avoid misleading users.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Leaked Data Types and Risks\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>While preparing the rootkit record, similar records in the existing records, different events seen with the same domain name, event date, number of records, and data classes were checked together. If there is an existing verified record, a new duplicate was not created, and new events were kept as separate records.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Although the target list shows a wider range of profile and forum details, it directly supports 65,825 open records, February 2011 period, and fields including email, username, IP address, and password.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>In the rootkit incident, the presence of security and hacking forum username, email, IP address, and password information together increases the risk of users being matched with other platforms using their technical community identities.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Verified Scope and Boundaries\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Although this incident has not been classified in a confidential context, the types of leaked data can lead to targeted attacks on users when combined with other datasets. In a rootkit data leak, the level of risk cannot be explained solely by the number of records. When fields such as email address, username, password, IP address, full name, or date of birth are seen together, attackers can create more realistic phishing messages and password testing scenarios.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Because the domain associated with the rootkit did not provide healthy access, this record also represents the long-term security impact of services that are closed or separated from their old structure. Accounts used on poker, gaming, art, travel, education, or business network platforms can continue to exist elsewhere with the same email and password even if they are forgotten over time. Therefore, old breaches can affect current account security.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>User Groups at Risk\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>In records where password information is available, the first step for users should be to change all accounts that use the same or a similar password. A plain text password can be used directly; if it is a password hash, it can be cracked depending on the algorithm and the weakness of the password. A unique password and multi-factor authentication are the basic defense.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>When email addresses and usernames are exposed, attackers do not only perform automated login attempts. Fake notifications using an old membership name, support request impersonations, password reset messages, and fraud scenarios using personal context become more convincing.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Fields such as IP address, date of birth, full name, or purchase\u002Ftravel context can make it easier to match the user's identity, location, or past membership history when combined with other leaks. Therefore, additional profile fields should be carefully evaluated.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>When determining data classes for the rootkit, details that appear in larger lists but are unsupported have been left out. This approach aims to provide the clearest risk table supported rather than offering the user a more striking but weaker claim.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>For corporate users, this incident shows that passwords used for personal accounts can jump to corporate systems. If a password that an employee used in an old gaming, travel, education, art, or poker account is also used in corporate systems, the incident can directly affect corporate security.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The recommended actions for individual users are clear: retire the password used in the relevant service, not use the same password anywhere else, update account recovery information, check session history, and be cautious of unexpected verification code requests.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Users searching for a rootkit data breach often only want to find out whether their email address is on the list. For a correct interpretation, the date of the incident, the types of data it includes, how many records were affected, and whether it has been mixed with other records belonging to the same service should be read together.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Urgent Measures to Be Taken\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>This record has been organized in a way that makes the scope of the incident understandable through different designations such as Rootkit data breach, Rootkit data leakage, rootkit.com security incident, number of affected accounts, types of leaked data, and password security. Nevertheless, details that have not been confirmed are not presented as definite information.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different types of data may be seen for the same service in violation lists. On this page, the events associated with the domain rootkit.com have been reduced to the supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Long-Term Security Strategies\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Record Control and User Action\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>The conservative approach applied in rootkit logging is important because different record counts, different dates, or different data types may appear for the same service in violation lists. On this page, events associated with the rootkit.com domain are reduced to supported findings, and it is clearly explained which security steps the user should prioritize. If the rootkit account has been used in the past, it should also be checked whether the same email and password pattern has been used on other accounts.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>As a result, the Rootkit incident is a security record that involves approximately 65,825 accounts and is associated with fields such as email addresses, usernames, IP addresses, and password information. When users see this record, instead of panicking, they should stop reusing passwords, enable multi-factor authentication, and be cautious with messages coming from old membership information.\u003C\u002Fp>","Rootkit Data Breach (65.8 Thousand Reported Records)","Rootkit Data Breach. 65.8 Thousand reported records are reported. Reported data: Email addresses, Usernames, IP addresses. Review the scope, risks, and…","\u002Fuploads\u002Flogo\u002Frootkit.svg",false,{"name":41,"sector":42,"country":43,"website":9,"websiteArchiveUrl":44,"websiteStatus":44,"websiteCheckedAt":12},"Rootkit","Hacking \u002F Malware Forum","United States",""]