Louis Vuitton UK Targeted by Cyberattack: LVMH Faces Third Breach in Just Three Months

The luxury fashion brand Louis Vuitton is currently investigating a significant data breach affecting its operations in the UK. This incident, which occurred on July 2, 2025, marks the third such security breach linked to LVMH brands in just three months.

In a communication to customers, the company disclosed that personal data, including names, contact information, and purchase histories, was compromised. Fortunately, access to financial data remained unaffected. Louis Vuitton has reached out to those impacted and has also notified the UK Information Commissioner’s Office as mandated by data protection regulations.

The email notification sent to customers was initially in Italian and has been translated for readers.

Pattern of Attacks Across LVMH

This breach is part of a troubling trend, following similar attacks that targeted Louis Vuitton’s South Korea division and Christian Dior Couture in recent months. Although details surrounding those incidents remain largely undisclosed, their occurrence raises serious concerns regarding LVMH’s overall cybersecurity posture. While no group has openly claimed responsibility for these coordinated attacks, the timing has drawn scrutiny from analysts within the cybersecurity field.

What Was Accessed

Louis Vuitton has confirmed that the attackers accessed specific details regarding their customers. These include:

Detail Information
Date of breach July 2, 2025
Data compromised Names, contact details, purchase history
Financial data Not compromised
Breach history Third incident in three months
Company response Authorities notified; customers cautioned about potential scams

The company emphasized that no passwords, credit card information, or login credentials were involved in this breach.

Advice to Customers

Customers affected by the breach are being advised to be vigilant for phishing attempts. Such attempts may involve emails or messages that refer to recent purchases or special offers, potentially misleading individuals into revealing additional personal information. Security experts recommend avoiding links in unsolicited messages, monitoring accounts for any unusual activity, and enabling multi-factor authentication wherever possible to mitigate risks.

Response from Louis Vuitton

In response to the breach, Louis Vuitton is collaborating with external cybersecurity firms to conduct a thorough investigation and secure its systems. A forensic review is ongoing, although the company has not yet disclosed how the attackers gained access or the exact number of affected customers. Representatives from the company have stated that technical and organizational measures are being implemented to strengthen their cybersecurity defenses.

Industry Concerns Growing

This breach adds to a worrying trend of high-profile cyberattacks on major global brands in 2025, particularly targeting sectors like fashion, retail, and hospitality. These industries often handle large quantities of customer data, making them appealing targets for cybercriminals. As LVMH operates more than 70 brands, including Louis Vuitton, Dior, and Fendi, potential vulnerabilities in its security strategy can lead to significant concerns regarding its ability to safeguard customer information.

At present, Louis Vuitton is focused on containing the fallout from this breach; however, the series of incidents within a short span raises critical questions about whether these breaches are standalone events or indicative of systemic cybersecurity issues.

Bad Year for UK Retailers

The current landscape for UK retailers concerning cybersecurity is dire, with high-profile brands such as Marks & Spencer and Harrods also suffering data breaches this year—many of which are reportedly linked to the hacking group Scattered Spider. Recent arrests made by the UK’s National Crime Agency suggest that authorities are closing in on the group, yet the timing of Louis Vuitton’s breach coincided with these developments, leading to speculation about possible connections. Whether the same adversaries are responsible for these multiple incidents remains to be clarified as investigations continue.

Source