Filtración limitada de nombres y fotos de unos 30.000 conductores de Yummy

What this source supports

• Yummy detected an unauthorized extraction attempt on the night of 8 March
• the target was names and profile photos of approximately 30,000 affiliated drivers
• the company says it fixed an unspecified vulnerability and denied exposure of other listed fields

Evidence limits

This initial statement calls the event an attempt and says no user data was compromised; Zavarce later clarified in a public reply preserved by El Pitazo and other reports that names/photos did leak.

Relevance to this case

Primary for detection, target fields, remediation and explicit limits; read together with the later clarification.

What this source supports

• VECERT publicly attributed a claim concerning approximately 30,000 driver images/names to GordonFreeman
• the exact post identifies Yummy and Venezuela

Evidence limits

Threat-intelligence publication of an actor-derived allegation; its small forum preview does not authenticate a dataset, establish access or prove actor responsibility.

Relevance to this case

Primary public provenance for the actor claim, not independent confirmation of attribution or the dataset.

What this source supports

• Grupo Apok includes Yummy in a later multi-platform roundup
• the article repeats the approximate 30,000-driver scope

Evidence limits

Later derivative overview with no primary artifact or independent technical validation.

Relevance to this case

Context for public circulation only.

What this source supports

• El Diario reproduces the initial Yummy statement
• the report identifies the targeted fields and the company denials

Evidence limits

Accurate for the initial statement but published before/without the later explicit clarification that names/photos leaked.

Relevance to this case

Corroborates the company announcement and its original wording.

What this source supports

• El Nacional quotes Zavarce's later clarification that names/photos of approximately 30,000 drivers were leaked
• the article reports that the company limited the exposed fields to names/photos

Evidence limits

Secondary report reproducing a direct CEO clarification; it does not independently validate the actor or dataset.

Relevance to this case

Strong corroboration of the company's later, explicit limited-leak confirmation.

What this source supports

• El Pitazo preserves the CEO's direct later reply confirming that names/photos of approximately 30,000 drivers leaked
• the same report preserves the earlier statement and its denials of other fields

Evidence limits

The later reply is preserved as an article image rather than an exact status permalink; no dataset or forensic report is supplied.

Relevance to this case

Strongest preserved evidence for the company's explicit limited-leak confirmation.

What this source supports

• Últimas Noticias includes Yummy in a broader startup-incident roundup
• the article reports both the actor allegation and the company's narrower account

Evidence limits

Derivative multi-incident coverage without independent technical evidence.

Relevance to this case

Context only; not independent validation of actor, dataset or access.

What this source supports

• La Patilla republishes CriptoNoticias reporting on the Yummy and RAPIKOM claims
• the article attributes the Yummy allegation to VECERT

Evidence limits

Explicitly derivative and predates or omits the company's complete later clarification.

Relevance to this case

Documents initial public circulation and the distinct shared RAPIKOM/Yummy reporting lineage.

What this source supports

• The article preserves the initial statement and the CEO's later reply confirming the limited names/photos leak
• it also preserves an apparent actor-forum preview

Evidence limits

The headline/editorial framing is adversarial and the apparent forum preview is not an authenticated dataset; useful primarily for preserved direct statements.

Relevance to this case

Corroborates both stages of the company account while requiring separation from editorial claims.

What this source supports

• ALNavío reproduces the company's initial statement about the attempted extraction, remediation and denied fields

Evidence limits

Covers the initial statement only and does not establish the later confirmed limited leak or actor attribution.

Relevance to this case

Corroborates the initial official disclosure.