[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$f4RVP7i2gSBZ7cke3ITdg5f-2L0NHoRONEPk8pBqu7gQ":3},{"success":4,"breach":5},true,{"_id":6,"name":7,"title":8,"slug":9,"domain":10,"company":11,"breachDate":15,"addedDate":16,"modifiedDate":16,"pwnCount":17,"totalRecords":17,"dataClasses":18,"description":20,"source":21,"isVerified":4,"isSpamList":22,"isSensitive":4,"severity":23,"processingStatus":24,"logoUrl":25,"contentUpdatedAt":16,"hasEnglishDescription":4},"6a6692411332fdde5f51180c","Trellix2026","Trellix 2026 Kaynak Kodu İhlali","trellix-2026","trellix.com",{"name":12,"sector":13,"country":14,"website":10},"Trellix","Cybersecurity","United States","2026-04-18T00:00:00.000Z","2026-07-26T23:03:29.302Z",0,[19],"Source code repository data","\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>The Trellix 2026 data breach\u003C\u002Fstrong> is an incident in which the cybersecurity company confirmed unauthorized access to a portion of its source-code repository. Trellix activated its response process, worked with external forensic specialists, and notified law enforcement. The investigation completed in July 2026 found that the incident had been contained and eradicated, that the source-code release and distribution process was not affected, and that there was no evidence the code had been exploited.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The company's statement is the primary source. BleepingComputer and Cybersecurity Dive independently corroborated the access to a portion of the repository through responses from a Trellix spokesperson. The company did not disclose the number of files, affected products, code versions, or data volume. It also did not confirm exposure of personal, employee, or customer data, so the person count remains unknown and the data class is limited to source-code repository data.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Confirmed Data Scope\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>The verified scope is unauthorized access to a portion of Trellix's source-code repository. The company did not identify the projects or branches viewed, whether files were downloaded, or whether the accessed code was current or used in production. “A portion” does not mean all Trellix source code was exposed. LeakData therefore lists only the broad repository-data category confirmed by the company.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Trellix did not confirm compromise of customer data, personal information, employee records, credentials, access keys, or threat telemetry. Those fields are not added to the data classes. Figures describing more than 50,000 business and government customers are company-scale information, not breach scope. A zero pwnCount means no verified person-based total was published, not that the incident had no significance.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Incident Timeline\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Trellix made its first public disclosure in early May 2026. In its July update, the company said the forensic investigation was complete and found no evidence of successful unauthorized activity after April 18, 2026. The exact initial-access date was not disclosed. The April 18 date in LeakData represents the verified last-activity boundary, not a claim that access began on that day.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The July 15 update said containment and eradication phases had been completed. That later information is stronger than the initial May statement that the investigation was still underway. A detailed inventory of accessed code and the technical initial-access method remain undisclosed. This entry uses settled findings without inventing an unavailable chronology.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Release Process and Product Security\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Trellix found no evidence that its source-code release or distribution process had been affected. That means the investigation did not identify unauthorized code changes or malicious content inserted into software delivered to customers. The company also found no evidence that its source code had been exploited. These are important, verified boundaries for assessing software-supply-chain risk.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>“No evidence found” does not mathematically eliminate every possible risk; it states the finding of the completed investigation. Repository access could theoretically help an actor study product architecture or detection logic, but Trellix did not confirm such analysis or a follow-on attack. LeakData does not present possible risk scenarios as actual exploitation.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Potential Enterprise Risk\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Source code can reveal information about data flows, component relationships, and engineering decisions in security products. Unauthorized access might theoretically support vulnerability research, defense evasion, or social engineering. Realization of that risk depends on the scope and freshness of the code and whether the actor actually copied it. Those details were not disclosed, so no definite customer impact can be inferred.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>Trellix customers should not assume their environments were compromised solely because of this event. The finding that distribution was unaffected does not support claims that malicious code was inserted into product updates. Organizations can still verify signed updates, monitor Trellix advisories, and confirm unexpected support or update messages through official channels as ordinary defensive practice.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>Trellix's Response\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>Trellix activated its incident-response process, engaged leading forensic experts, and informed law enforcement. In July it said the implemented containment measures and continuing monitoring had achieved containment and eradication. The absence of successful unauthorized activity after April 18 is another concrete finding produced by that monitoring.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The company did not disclose the actor, initial-access method, credentials involved, possible ransom demand, or list of accessed files. It also did not provide additional detail in response to questions about corporate or customer data. LeakData does not fill those gaps with assumptions; it records only the published findings of the completed investigation and reliable press corroboration.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Ch2>How to Interpret This LeakData Record\u003C\u002Fh2>\n\u003Cp>This is a confirmed corporate source-code repository breach, not a person-based personal-data counter. A zero affected-person value does not make the event fabricated or unimportant; it reflects the absence of a person-based scope. Customer counts, protected endpoints, and Trellix's global scale cannot be used as affected-record totals. The data class represents only the confirmed repository scope.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The verified conclusion is that an unauthorized party accessed a portion of Trellix's source-code repository, the event was contained and eradicated, and no successful unauthorized activity was found after April 18. There is no evidence the release and distribution process was affected or the code exploited, and no customer or personal-data impact was confirmed. LeakData documents the real breach within those limits.\u003C\u002Fp>","Source code repository breach",false,"Low","completed","\u002Fuploads\u002Flogo\u002Ftrellix_com.svg"]