MyRecon OSINT
Under Armour
On 17 November 2025, Under Armour was breached. 72,742,892 accounts were exposed, including dates of birth, email addresses, genders. MyRecon rates it 68/100, severe. That is roughly everyone in the United Kingdom.
The size is not the interesting part. What matters here is the two-month gap: the ransomware group claimed the intrusion in November, and the data only reached a public forum in January. For anyone in that file, the exposure began long before there was anything to read about it.
That gap is the norm rather than the exception, which is why "we have seen no evidence of misuse" in a disclosure statement means considerably less than it sounds like.
The story behind the breach
In November 2025, the Everest ransomware group claimed Under Armour as a victim and attempted to extort a ransom , alleging they had obtained access to 343GB of data. In January 2026, customer data from the incident was published publicly on a popular hacking forum , including 72M email addresses. Many records also contained additional personal information such as names, dates of birth, genders, geographic locations and purchase information.
Breach description from Have I Been Pwned, used under a CC BY 4.0 licence. Data provided to HIBP by DeHashed.
How did it happen?
The published account does not explain the exact way the data was obtained.
What was the motive?
In November 2025, the Everest ransomware group claimed Under Armour as a victim and attempted to extort a ransom , alleging they had obtained access to 343GB of data.
Reported demands or attempts to sell data describe what happened, rather than prove every attacker's intention.
What was the outcome?
72,742,892 accounts are listed in this breach. This is a count of accounts, not necessarily individual people.
The reported exposed data includes Dates of birth, Email addresses, Genders, Geographic locations, Names, Purchases.
What was exposed, and why it matters
- Dates of birthOne of the three things call centres ask to verify identity, and it never changes.
- Email addressesThe address becomes a confirmed, active target, expect more phishing, better aimed.
- GendersSmall on its own; useful to anyone assembling a fuller profile.
- Geographic locationsWhere the account was used, which narrows a person down further than most people expect.
- NamesTurns an anonymous address into an identified person, which is what makes targeted phishing possible.
- PurchasesWhat was bought and when, detail that makes an impersonation convincing.
What to do if you were in it
- Expect better-aimed phishing. A message that already knows your name and where you have an account is the whole point of a breach like this.
Questions people ask about this breach
Was my email address in the Under Armour breach?
Use the email box on this page. The result applies only to this incident. If the provider does not cover this breach, we say so. A missing match does not prove you were unaffected.
What data was leaked in the Under Armour breach?
dates of birth, email addresses, genders, geographic locations, names, purchases. Each one is explained above, along with what it means for the person it belongs to.
When did it happen, and when did it become public?
The breach is dated 17 November 2025. It was published to Have I Been Pwned on 21 January 2026, a gap of 65 days during which the data was already out.
Is the Under Armour breach real?
Yes. Have I Been Pwned lists it as verified, meaning the data was checked against the source rather than taken on trust.
How many people were affected?
72,742,892 accounts. That is roughly everyone in the United Kingdom. That is accounts rather than people, one person often has several.
Read next
Also in the archive
Case Files: how the landmark breaches actually happened →
Three kinds of content appear on this page and they are kept apart deliberately. The breach description is quoted from Have I Been Pwned under its licence. The severity score, the field-by-field explanation and the advice are computed from the record itself, every sentence derives from a number or a flag in it, which is what stops the analysis drifting from the evidence. Anything under the "MyRecon's take" byline is editorial: our reading of this breach, presented as opinion rather than as a finding.