Observation window 2026-09-28T00:00:00.000Z through 2026-10-05T00:00:00.000Z (exclusive UTC). This frozen digest describes provider-observed claim cadence for one complete ISO week; it is not an incident confirmation, targeting evidence, attribution, or a prediction of future risk.
direwolf had no newly observed claims in the target week after a baseline median of 6 per week across 7 of the prior 8 weeks. This describes provider observations only, not whether the group stopped operating.
Why this appeared: Target 0 claims with baseline median 6 ≥ 3 and activity in 7 ≥ 5 of 8 baseline weeks; all baseline providers healthy.
Providers newly observed 31 claims attributed to Bavacai in the target week, versus an 8-week median of 0.
Why this appeared: Target 31 ≥ 4 and ≥ 2× the median (0) and exceeds it by ≥ 3.
Providers newly observed 18 claims attributed to Majinahanashi in the target week, versus an 8-week median of 0.
Why this appeared: Target 18 ≥ 4 and ≥ 2× the median (0) and exceeds it by ≥ 3.
Imnotavillian first qualified as emerging within this ISO week, with 9 newly observed claims. Dates describe provider observations, not when the operation began.
Why this appeared: Qualifying tracker-first discovery timestamp falls inside the target ISO week; emergence derivation returned "emerging".
vypr first qualified as emerging within this ISO week, with 7 newly observed claims. Dates describe provider observations, not when the operation began.
Why this appeared: Qualifying tracker-first discovery timestamp falls inside the target ISO week; emergence derivation returned "emerging".
leakeddata had no newly observed claims in the target week after a baseline median of 6 per week across 7 of the prior 8 weeks. This describes provider observations only, not whether the group stopped operating.
Why this appeared: Target 0 claims with baseline median 6 ≥ 3 and activity in 7 ≥ 5 of 8 baseline weeks; all baseline providers healthy.
global cybernetic collective first qualified as emerging within this ISO week, with 7 newly observed claims. Dates describe provider observations, not when the operation began.
Why this appeared: Qualifying tracker-first discovery timestamp falls inside the target ISO week; emergence derivation returned "emerging".
Providers newly observed 18 claims attributed to ZaWoo in the target week, versus an 8-week median of 0.
Why this appeared: Target 18 ≥ 4 and ≥ 2× the median (0) and exceeds it by ≥ 3.
Related: all weekly signal digests, country and sector activity profiles, and the claim-publishing calendar for the surrounding weeks.
How to cite: Dragons Eye Ransomware Tracker, “Week in Ransomware 2026-W40”, provider-observed ransomware claim data as of 2026-10-06, this page's URL. Keep the observed-claim caveat with any reused figures; the methodology documents the evidence model and the data-quality dashboard quantifies screening and exclusions.
Ordered by measured change and, where available, AI-prioritized; every fact is calculated deterministically from provider observations. Records are provider-reported claims, not confirmed incidents. Source: reconciled leak-site victim claims across independent providers.
Source: reconciled leak-site victim claims aggregated from documented public monitoring providers. Independent providers are distinguished from mirrors, and no provider count verifies an underlying allegation. Definitions for every term used here are in the glossary.
Victim records are provider-reported allegations, not independently verified breaches. Published for research, defense, and educational use.