Givenchy DIGITAL

Enterprise Technology Stack & Vendor Relationships

Givenchy is a wholly owned brand of LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE; LVMH’s own Form 20-F filed with the U.S. SEC lists Parfums Givenchy entities as 100%-owned subsidiaries across multiple jurisdictions, the most recent such SEC filing identified in this research dating to fiscal year 2002 [pre-2020]¹. No public evidence identified that Givenchy, as a brand, holds a direct licensing, subscription, or integration relationship with Check Point, Wiz, SentinelOne, CyberArk, NICE, Verint, Claroty, or Palo Alto Networks; searches pairing each of these seven vendor names with “LVMH” or “Givenchy” returned no vendor-customer announcement, case study, or news report naming either company as a customer^{2, 3}. The one verified relationship this research found between LVMH’s controlling family and an Israeli technology company is an investment, not a vendor relationship: Bernard Arnault, LVMH’s Chairman and CEO and, through Christian Dior SE and Groupe Arnault, its controlling shareholder, joined a $120 million Series B funding round in the Israeli cloud-security firm Wiz in June 2021 through his family investment vehicle Aglaé Ventures, which is backed by Agache, Arnault’s holding company [pre-2020]^{2, 4}. That equity position in an independent Israeli company ended when Google completed an approximately $32 billion all-cash acquisition of Wiz, reported as closing around March 2026, after which Wiz has continued to operate as a unit of Google Cloud⁵. Google’s own legal counsel on the transaction confirmed that the deal closed on 11 March 2026 at a reported $32 billion in cash, with unconditional antitrust clearance from the United States, the European Commission, Australia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Türkiye, after which Wiz became part of Google Cloud; on that confirmed date, the Aglaé Ventures stake in independent-company Wiz is documented as having ended, having continued without any reported divestment through both the International Court of Justice’s 19 July 2024 advisory opinion and the International Criminal Court’s November 2024 arrest warrants⁶. LVMH’s own enterprise cloud and AI infrastructure relationships identified in this research point to Google Cloud and the Paris-headquartered AI platform Dataiku, not to any Israeli-origin cybersecurity vendor: LVMH and Google Cloud announced a multi-year strategic partnership on 16 June 2021 covering AI and cloud-based innovation across LVMH’s maisons [pre-2020]⁷, and a case study published on Dataiku’s own blog describes LVMH using Dataiku as the backbone of an internal AI deployment programme, with Dataiku’s co-founder and CEO Florian Douetteau based in Paris⁸. No public evidence identified of a systems integrator or IT-outsourcing partner engaged specifically by Givenchy that has mandated, recommended, or deployed Israeli-origin technology; a drill-down on the Israeli multi-brand distributor Global Brands Gallery, which uses the Israeli vendor Priority Software’s retail-management ERP, found no documentation that Givenchy is among the brands Global Brands Gallery carries⁹. South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission disclosed on 12 February 2026 that the SaaS customer-management platform compromised in the 2025 breaches affecting Louis Vuitton Korea, Christian Dior Couture Korea, and Tiffany Korea was Salesforce, with the intrusions attributed to a threat-actor group tracked as Scattered LAPSUS$ Hunters, and no Israeli-origin vendor, product, or jurisdiction named in any source retrieved in this research on the incident^{10, 11}. No public evidence identified that Givenchy or any other LVMH brand beyond Louis Vuitton Korea, Christian Dior Couture Korea, and Tiffany Korea was named as a respondent in that PIPC decision, and no source retrieved in this research names a Givenchy-specific SaaS vendor relationship at all, Israeli-origin or otherwise^{11, 12, 13, 14}.

Surveillance, Biometrics & Retail Technology

No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH uses Trigo, BriefCam, AnyVision/Oosto, or Trax for in-store facial recognition, loss prevention, or frictionless-checkout applications; each of these vendors was confirmed to be an active retail-technology provider in its own right, but no source pairs any of them with LVMH or Givenchy^{15, 16, 17}. The one documented biometric-data controversy involving an LVMH entity concerns Louis Vuitton North America, Inc., a separate LVMH subsidiary from Givenchy: a proposed class action filed in Manhattan in April 2022 alleges that Louis Vuitton’s online eyewear “Virtual Try-On” tool collected complete facial scans without consent, in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, with the data said to be converted to code and sent to an outside server [pre-2020 is not applicable; dated 2022]^{18, 19}. No vendor or third-party technology provider is named in the reporting on that complaint, and no equivalent complaint, tool, or technology was identified for Givenchy specifically^{18, 19}. No public evidence identified of Israeli-origin predictive-policing, sentiment-analysis, social-media-monitoring, or workforce-surveillance tools used by Givenchy or LVMH^{15, 16}. No public evidence identified that any of the facial-recognition or retail-analytics vendors named in this section reach Givenchy or LVMH indirectly through a third-party platform, managed-security-service, or bundled enterprise suite; the only identified third-party platform relationships are the non-Israeli Google Cloud and Dataiku partnerships described above^{7, 8}.

Cloud Infrastructure, Data Residency & Sovereign Cloud Participation

No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH operates, leases, or co-locates data-center infrastructure within Israel^{20, 21}. No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH participates in Project Nimbus or any comparable Israeli state-backed cloud programme; Project Nimbus’s only disclosed cloud contractors in the reporting retrieved this session are Google and Amazon Web Services, under a roughly $1.2 billion, multi-phase Israeli government tender²¹. LVMH’s disclosed cloud partnership with Google, announced in June 2021, predates and is organizationally separate from Google’s own October 2022 launch of a Google Cloud region in Tel Aviv (region code me-west1), and no source retrieved in this research describes LVMH customer data being routed through or stored in that Israeli region specifically [pre-2020 applies to the 2021 partnership date]^{7, 22}. No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH provides, markets, or contracts services explicitly intended to ensure digital sovereignty, data residency, or infrastructure resilience for Israeli state institutions or military bodies^{20, 21}. Separately, LVMH disclosed in 2025 reporting that UK customer data had been stolen in a cyber-attack described as the third such incident disclosed by the group in recent months; no Israeli-origin vendor, attacker, or technology is named in connection with that breach²³. No public evidence identified that the Salesforce-based SaaS platform compromised in the separate, later-disclosed South Korea breaches affecting Louis Vuitton Korea, Christian Dior Couture Korea, and Tiffany Korea routed, stored, or processed data through Israeli jurisdiction or Israeli-controlled infrastructure, or that any Israeli-origin vendor was involved in that incident^{10, 11}.

Defence, Intelligence & Security Sector Technology Relationships

No public evidence identified of any contract, partnership, or service agreement between Givenchy or LVMH and the Israeli Ministry of Defence, Israel Defense Forces, Israeli intelligence agencies, or other Israeli state security bodies, in any source retrieved from UN OHCHR reporting, Who Profits publications, or general news search in this research^{24, 25, 26}. No public evidence identified that any commercially available Givenchy or LVMH technology has been reported, confirmed, or documented by researchers as deployed for military, intelligence, or law-enforcement surveillance applications within Israel or the occupied territories^{24, 25}. No public evidence identified of any development, sale, licensing, or maintenance of offensive cyber capabilities, zero-day exploit tools, or digital-weapons systems by Givenchy or LVMH^{24, 25}.

AI, Algorithmic & Autonomous Systems

The only verified AI/ML deployment identified for LVMH is consumer- and operations-facing: the June 2021 Google Cloud partnership is described as supporting demand forecasting, personalization, and inventory optimization across LVMH’s retail brands, and the Dataiku-based platform is described as LVMH’s internal AI deployment backbone [pre-2020 applies to the 2021 partnership]^{7, 8}. No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH has provided artificial intelligence, machine learning, computer vision, or autonomous decision-support systems to any Israeli state, military, or security body^{24, 25}. No public evidence identified that any Givenchy or LVMH AI model or platform has been trained on, or given access to, civilian population data, intercepted communications, or surveillance-derived datasets originating from Israel or the occupied territories^{24, 25}. No public evidence identified of any Givenchy- or LVMH-provided autonomous target-generation, automated-threat-detection, or autonomous-tracking system supplied to Israeli military or security forces; no Givenchy or LVMH product identified in this research is purpose-built for kinetic military effect, so no part of this audit’s findings falls within the Military domain boundary^{24, 25}. No public evidence identified of any partnership, contract, or joint venture between Givenchy or LVMH and Palantir Technologies; searches pairing “LVMH” with “Palantir” returned no vendor-customer announcement, case study, or news report, and LVMH’s confirmed AI/cloud partners remain Google Cloud and, for China retail operations, Alibaba²⁷.

Technology Ecosystem & R&D Footprint

No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH operates a research-and-development facility, engineering office, innovation lab, or accelerator programme within Israel; the one LVMH startup showcase identified in this research, at the VivaTech trade fair, featured non-Israeli startups (3D Look and Automat) rather than an Israeli facility⁷. Three Arnault-family or LVMH-affiliated investment vehicles were found to hold or have held minority stakes in Israeli technology companies, documented here individually under the audit’s named-entity and act-record requirement. First, Aglaé Ventures - the personal venture vehicle of Bernard Arnault, backed by his holding company Agache - joined Wiz’s $120 million Series B round in June 2021; this is reported by Globes, IsraelValley, and Calcalist/CTech, all third-party news domains rather than Givenchy’s, LVMH’s, or Wiz’s own sites, with the earliest dated observation 10 June 2021 and the most recent dated observation the confirmed 11 March 2026 closing of Google’s acquisition of Wiz, at which point the position in an independent Israeli company ended [pre-2020]^{2, 4, 5, 6}. Second, L Catterton - a private-equity vehicle that a 2016 PR Newswire release confirms is 40%-owned jointly by LVMH and Groupe Arnault, with the remaining 60% held by Catterton’s own partners - invested $34 million for a 35.8% stake in the Israeli cosmetics company Il Makiage; this is reported by Globes, a third-party news domain, with the only dated observation found being 5 June 2017, and no later reporting on whether the stake is still held was identified in this research [pre-2020]^{28, 29}. Third, LVMH Luxury Ventures, LVMH’s own corporate venture arm established in 2017, took an undisclosed minority stake in a $90 million funding round for the Israeli lab-grown-diamond maker Lusix, with the funds stated to be intended partly for expanding Lusix’s production capacity in Israel; this is reported via a Yahoo Finance republication of a June 2022 report and corroborated by a September 2026 news report on an unrelated boycott-campaign controversy, with no later reporting on the stake identified in this research^{30, 31}. None of Lusix or Il Makiage is a surveillance, cyber, AI, or SIGINT firm within the rubric’s named sector; Wiz is the one investment in this group that falls squarely within the rubric’s named Israeli cyber/AI vendor category^{2, 4, 5, 6}. A broader review of Bernard Arnault’s personal technology-investment activity, conducted in this expansion run to test for any further Israeli-sector holding, found that his family office Aglaé Ventures backed five AI startups during 2024 - H (also styled H Company, based in Paris, France, co-founded by a Stanford researcher and four Google DeepMind alumni), Borderless AI (a Canadian human-resources-management startup), Photoroom (a Parisian AI image-editing company), Lamini (an enterprise AI startup reported to be based in California), and Proxima (a digital-marketing platform reported to be based in New York) - in transactions reported to total more than $300 million, with none of the five identified as Israeli-founded or Israeli-headquartered and none described as a surveillance, cyber, or defense-technology company^{32, 33}. On named controlling principals and executives: Bernard Arnault (LVMH Chairman and CEO, controlling shareholder) was searched by name for Israeli surveillance/cyber/AI/military-tech ties, with the Wiz investment as the confirmed finding described above, and with this expansion run’s review of his broader 2024 AI-investment activity surfacing no further Israeli-sector holding^{2, 4, 32, 33}. Amandine Ohayon, Givenchy’s CEO since 9 January 2026, was searched by name for Israel-related ties, including a refreshed search in the prior expansion run; searched, none found³⁴. Alessandro Valenti, Givenchy’s CEO immediately before Ohayon, was searched by name for Israel-related ties; searched, none found³⁵. Renaud de Lesquen, a prior Givenchy CEO, was searched by name for Israel-related ties; searched, none found³⁶. Philippe Fortunato, a former CEO of Givenchy SA now serving as a director of the UK entity Givenchy Couture Ltd, was searched by name for Israel-related ties; searched, none found³⁷. Pietro Beccari, who became Chairman and CEO of LVMH Fashion Group effective 1 January 2026 in addition to his existing role as CEO of Louis Vuitton, to whom Givenchy’s CEO reports, was searched by name for Israel-related ties on LVMH’s own press announcement of that appointment, which does not mention Israel or any Israeli company in any capacity; searched, none found²⁷. No public evidence identified of any patent portfolio, licensing agreement, or co-development arrangement between Givenchy or LVMH and any Israeli-domiciled entity or research institution such as the Technion, Hebrew University, or the Weizmann Institute; sources describing those institutions’ actual technology partnerships name other partners (including Max Planck and the University of Michigan) but do not mention LVMH or Givenchy in any capacity^{38, 39}.

On the question of whether the audit’s dated citation for Amandine Ohayon’s Givenchy CEO appointment actually confirms the stated 9 January 2026 effective date: the cited businesschief.com article reports LVMH’s announcement using forward-looking, future-tense language - “Effective January 9, 2026, Amandine Ohayon will assume the role of CEO at Givenchy, succeeding Alessandro Valenti” - rather than confirming, after the fact, that the transition occurred; this is consistent with contemporaneous reporting that situates LVMH’s own announcement on Wednesday, 7 January 2026, i.e. two days before the stated effective date, using present-perfect language for the appointment decision itself (“Amandine Ohayon has been appointed CEO of Givenchy”) but future tense for the start date (“these appointments will take effect on January 9 and January 12, 2026, respectively”)^{34, 40}. Standing alone, then, the 7 January-dated citation documents LVMH’s announcement of a planned effective date rather than independent, after-the-fact confirmation that Ohayon actually took up the post on 9 January 2026 as planned^{34, 40}. Independent after-the-fact confirmation that the transition did occur as announced was found in two later-dated sources: a FashionUnited profile, dated by its URL numbering to on or around 13 January 2026 (four days after the stated effective date), states in present-perfect tense that “Since January 9, 2026, Amandine Ohayon has been at the helm of Givenchy”⁴¹; and a FashionUnited Spain profile, dated by its URL numbering to on or around 26 June 2026 (nearly six months after the stated effective date), similarly states “Desde el 9 de enero de 2026, Amandine Ohayon se ha puesto al frente de Givenchy” (“Since 9 January 2026, Amandine Ohayon has taken charge of Givenchy”)⁴². Taken together, this confirms - rather than corrects - the audit’s existing statement that Amandine Ohayon has been Givenchy’s CEO since 9 January 2026, while clarifying that the confirmation rests on these later-dated, after-the-fact sources rather than on the original 7 January announcement-dated citation alone, which by itself only documents a forward-looking plan^{34, 40, 41, 42}.

Civil Society Scrutiny & Regulatory History

No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH is named in the Who Profits report retrieved in this research (on the Design City/Mishor Adumim settlement complex), which instead names Swarovski and several furniture and home-goods brands as tenant-adjacent companies²⁶. No public evidence identified that Givenchy or LVMH appears in the most recent reported updates to the UN OHCHR database of businesses linked to Israeli settlements; the September 2025 update (UN document A/HRC/60/19, dated by the report’s own file metadata to 8 October 2025) is independently reported by Al-Haq and by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre to follow from 733 submissions received alleging the potential involvement of 596 business enterprises, of which OHCHR states it reviewed 215 businesses (including all 97 companies listed in the 2023 cycle) “with available resources,” resulting in a published list of 158 enterprises from 11 countries - 68 newly added and 7 removed from the 2023 list because their involvement was found to have ceased, with 18 businesses providing additional information during the review - and with Heidelberg Materials, Steconfer, Ineco, Expedia Group, Booking Holdings, and Airbnb reported as among the additions and no fashion or luxury-goods company named in that reporting^{43, 25, 44, 45, 46}; this corrects an earlier version of this audit, which had stated 15 enterprises were removed in the 2025 cycle, a figure that both Al-Haq and the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre instead attribute to the 2023 cycle’s own review of its 2020 predecessor list, with the 2025 cycle’s removal count independently placed at 7 by both sources^{44, 45}. A further OHCHR database update, independently reported by the Palestinian news agency WAFA and dated 25 September 2026, brought the list to a reported 214 companies from 11 countries, adding 61 of the 126 enterprises evaluated in that cycle and removing 5 whose listed activity was found to have ceased, with that cycle’s reported sectoral focus on agriculture, transport, storage, waste management, energy, food, and hospitality services, and with neither Givenchy nor LVMH, nor any other fashion or luxury-goods company, named in that report⁴⁷. A separate September 2025 investigative report from the UNI Global Union Alliance and partner organizations on foreign companies allegedly profiting from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, names JCB, Comasco, Juganu, Carrefour, Elco Ltd and its subsidiary Electra Consumer Products, Global Retail CI (formerly Yenot Bitan), eDreams ODIGEO/Opodo, A.P. Moller-Maersk, TUI Travel, Siemens, Ofertex Industries, Extal, Twitoplast, BNP Paribas, HSBC, Bank Hapoalim, and Barclays; Givenchy and LVMH are absent from that report⁴⁸. A separate 2025 investigative report, Don’t Buy Into Occupation, was opened directly in this expansion run for the first time in this audit’s research history; its published landing page and table of contents - covering corporate and financial-institution involvement in the Israeli occupation together with a methodology annex and a company-list annex - do not mention Givenchy or LVMH anywhere in the retrievable page text, though the report’s own Annex 2 company list sits inside a downloadable PDF that could not be opened as page text in this session, so the absence is confirmed only for the landing page’s visible text and not for the full annex⁴⁹. Givenchy is named, alongside other fashion brands, as a contact target in a “Fashion Divest from Israel” petition hosted on Change.org, a platform for user-created campaigns rather than an established boycott-monitoring organization⁵⁰. A December 2023 Hyphen Online article states that “fashion houses such as Chanel, Givenchy, Louis Vuitton, Tommy Hilfiger, Ralph Lauren and Michael Kors have either voiced their support for or have financial ties with Israel,” while itself attributing this specific claim to a secondary website and not independently verifying it; this research likewise could not independently verify that specific claim and reports it here only as a published but unverified secondary assertion⁵¹. A 23 September 2026 report on backlash faced by UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for wearing LVMH-owned Loro Piana and Celine garments in a magazine photoshoot documents that pro-Palestinian boycott and brand-monitoring platforms currently name LVMH, as the parent of those two sibling maisons, as a company to avoid, citing Bernard Arnault’s 2021 Wiz investment and LVMH Luxury Ventures’ 2022 Lusix investment, both already documented above, as the stated grounds; that report does not name Givenchy among the cited brands and does not describe any company response to the specific campaign³¹. No public evidence identified of any Givenchy-specific company statement responding to a boycott or divestment campaign; the only Givenchy-adjacent LVMH-brand Israel episode identified in this research is Sephora’s August 2026 limited resale arrangement with the Israeli retailer Glam42, which Sephora itself denied constituted a store opening in Israel, and which does not mention Givenchy⁵². Separately, and not itself bearing on any Israel nexus, South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission decided on 11 February 2026 and announced on 12 February 2026 that it had fined three LVMH-group entities a combined approximately KRW 36.033 billion (reported as approximately USD 24.9 million to USD 25 million, with per-brand USD conversions varying by outlet) over 2025 customer-data breaches: Louis Vuitton Korea was fined the largest amount, reported as KRW 21.385 billion (reported by Bleeping Computer as USD 16.4 million), after malware on an employee’s device compromised credentials for the company’s Salesforce-based customer-management system, exposing data for approximately 3.6 million customers, with the regulator citing the absence of IP-based access restrictions and secure authentication for external access^{11, 12, 14, 10}. Christian Dior Couture Korea was fined KRW 12.236 billion (reported by Bleeping Computer as USD 9.4 million) after a customer-service employee was deceived by a phishing-type attack into granting access to the same type of SaaS system, exposing data for approximately 1.95 million customers, with the regulator finding Dior had not restricted IP-based access, had not limited bulk data exports, and had not inspected access logs, and had reported the breach to authorities five days after discovery against Korea’s statutory 72-hour notification deadline^{11, 14}. Tiffany Korea was fined a reported KRW 2.4 billion (reported by Bleeping Computer as USD 1.85 million) over a voice-phishing attack on a customer-service employee that exposed data for approximately 4,600 clients, with similar regulator findings on missing IP-based access controls and bulk-download limits^{11, 14}. The commission stated that the use of SaaS platforms does not transfer or exempt a company from its own responsibility for securing customer data^{11, 13}. No public evidence identified that Givenchy, or any LVMH brand other than Louis Vuitton Korea, Christian Dior Couture Korea, and Tiffany Korea, was named as a respondent in this PIPC decision^{11, 12, 13, 14}. No public evidence identified that the compromised Salesforce-based SaaS platform, or any other system involved in these breaches, routed, stored, or processed data through Israeli jurisdiction or Israeli-controlled infrastructure, or that any Israeli-origin vendor was involved; the one source identified that names the SaaS vendor attributes the intrusion to the Salesforce platform and to a threat-actor group tracked as Scattered LAPSUS$ Hunters, with no Israeli entity named in that reporting¹⁰. As of the date of this research, no appeal, further enforcement action, or additional LVMH-brand inclusion in this PIPC matter was identified in the sources retrieved^{11, 12, 13, 14}. No public evidence identified of any other regulatory inquiry, legal challenge, export-control action, or sanctions-related investigation involving Givenchy’s or LVMH’s technology sales or services to Israeli state entities^{25, 43}.