Cyber Risk – Security Breach Notification Statutes
Security breaches are making headlines the world over, with high-profile companies, including Target, Home Depot, LinkedIn, and Sony Pictures Entertainment, suffering crippling attacks over the past few years. Such breaches may be devastating to a business’ reputation. However, a breach may trigger important legal obligations under state and federal statutes. Nearly every state has enacted legislation governing a business’ obligation to notify an individual that his or her personal information may have been subject to a security breach. These laws are commonly referred to as “security breach” or “data breach” notification statutes. Fortunately, the expanding cyber liability insurance market offers insurance policies to cover the first-party and third-party expenses arising out of a security breach, including notification expenses. This survey is intended to examine several key, common issues with respect to state security breach notification laws. Below is an explanation of each column in the survey:
Who Must Comply
This column identifies who must comply with the statute. A majority of states provide that a “maintainer” of personal information is not required to provide notice to an impacted individual. Rather, a maintainer is charged with notifying the “owner” or “licensor,” and the “owner” or “licensor” must notify the impacted individual. Please consult the specific statute for the definition and responsibilities of a “maintainer.”
What is Personal Information
This column utilizes icons to define the phrase “personal information.” Please consult our key on the next page for the meaning of each icon
Notification Required Beyond Affected Individual
Every state with a notification statute requires that an individual impacted by the breach be notified. This column identifies whether there are any additional notice obligations.
When Must Notification Must Be Given
This column identifies when the notice obligation is triggered: when the security breach is discovered, or when there is a reasonable belief that “personal information” was acquired by an unauthorized person. This column also identifies the timeframe in which the impacted individual must be notified. A majority of states provide that notice may be delayed if a law enforcement agency determines that notification will impede a criminal investigation, notification shall typically be made after the law enforcement agency determines that notice will not compromise an investigation. A significant minority of states provide that if an entity conducts a good-faith investigation and determines there is not a reasonable likelihood of harm to the consumer, then notification is not required. Typically, the determination must be: (1) in writing, (2) maintained for a statutorily prescribed period of time, and (3) made in conjunction with local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies. Please consult the specific state statute for detailed requirements.
Private Cause of Action
This column identifies whether a law expressly provides an impacted individual with a private cause of action for an entity’s failure to comply with the notification requirements
Fines and Penalties
This column identifies whether the statute allows for fines and/or penalties to be assessed for failure to comply with the statute’s notification requirements.
KEY TO PERSONAL INFORMATION
- General Professional Information: Individual’s name + one of the following: Social Security number, driver’s license number, state issued identification number, and information sufficient to access financial accounts (i.e., personal identification number “PIN,” debit or credit card number, bank account number, account password, etc.)
- Abbreviated Terms:
- AG = State Attorney General
- PI = Personal Information
| State | Authority | Who Must Comply | What is PersonalInformation? | Notification Required BeyondAffected Individual | When Must Notification Be Given: | Private Cause of Action | Fines & Penalties | |
| Following: | Within: | |||||||
|
Alabama |
Al St § 8-38- 1, et seq. | Persons, businesses, or gov’t entities that: acquire or use sensitive PI. |
|
Yes: if over 1,000 individuals, notify AG and all national consumer reporting agencies | Investigation and rea- sonable belief that PI was acquired by un- authorized person, and is reasonably likely to cause substantial harm to individuals to whom the information relates. | Expeditiously without unreasonable delay, but within 45 days from notice of breach from third- party agent | No |
|
|
Alaska |
Alaska Stat. § 45.48.010,et seq. |
Persons doing business, person with more
than 10 employees, andgov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notifynational consumerreporting agencies | Investigation and reasonable belief harm has or will result from breach | Most expeditious time possible andwithout unreasonable delay | Statute Silent |
|
|
Arizona |
Ariz. Stat.§ 18-552 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t entities who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 individuals, notify three largest national consumer reporting agencies, AG, and director of AZ dept of homeland security. | Investigation and reasonable likelihood of breach | Within 45 days after determination of breach | No |
|
|
Arkansas |
Ark. Code § 4-110 101,et seq. |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 individuals, simultaneously (or within 45 days) notify AG | Reasonable belief that PI was acquired by unauthorized person and there is reasonable likelihood of harm to customers | Most expedient manner and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute silent | AG may bring suit under Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Ark. Code § 4-88-101 et seq.) |
|
California |
Cal. Civ
Code § 1798.29;§ 1798.80,et seq. |
Persons and businesses who:
|
|
Yes: if over 500 residents, provide copyof sample notificationto AG | Reasonable belief that PI was acquiredby unauthorizedperson | Most expedient manner and withoutunreasonable delay | Yes |
Affected individual may seek damages
For willful, intentional, or reckless breaches, customer may recover up to $3,000 per violation; otherwise, customer may recover up to $500 per violation |
|
Colorado |
Colo. Rev
Stat. § 6-1-716 |
Individuals and businesses who:
|
|
Yes: if over 500 Colorado residents, notify AG within 30 days and if over 1,000 residents, notify all national consumer reporting agencies | Investigation and reasonable likelihoodof misuse of PI | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay within 30 days of determination of breach | Statute silent | AG may bring action in law or equity to address violations of statute |
|
Connecticut |
Conn. Gen.
Stat. §36a-701b |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: simultaneously give notice to AG | Reasonable belief that PI was acquiredby unauthorizedperson |
Without unreasonable delay but not later than 60 days of discovery of breach. Note: See Bulletin IC-25 for provisions that apply to regis- trants and licensees of the CT Insurance Dept. |
Statute silent | Failure to comply with statute constitutes an unfair trade practice under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b andis enforceable by AG |
|
Delaware |
Del. Code tit. 6 § 12B-101, et seq. |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: If more then 500 residents, notify the AG | Investigation to determine likelihood that PI was or will be misused | Without unreasonable delay but within 60 days | Statute silent | AG may bring an action in law or equity for violations of statute and may recover direct economic damages or “other relief that may be appropriate to ensure proper compliance,” or both |
|
District of Columbia |
D.C. Code § 28-3851,et seq |
Persons and entities
who:
|
|
Yes: if over 50 residents, simultaneously notify the AG and if over 1,000 residents, notify all national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of a breach | Most expedient manner and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute Silent |
|
|
Florida |
Fla. Stat. § 501.171 |
Businesses and gov’t
entities who:
|
|
Yes: if over 500 residents, notify FL Dept. of Legal Affairs (within 30days) and if over 1,000residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Reasonable belief that PI was accessedas a result of abreach | 30 days of determination ofbreach (may begiven additional 15days if good causeis shown) | No |
|
|
Georgia |
Ga. Code § 10-1-910 to§ 10-1-912,et seq. |
Persons, entities, and
certain gov’t agencieswho: • Maintain PI Note: for regulationsspecifically concernedwith requirements oftelephone records anda telecommunictaioncompany's obligations,see Ga. Code § 46-5-214 |
|
Yes: if over 10,000 residents, notify national consumer reportingagencies | A breach where residents’ unencrypted PI was, or is reasonably believed to havebeen, acquired by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Statute silent |
|
Hawaii |
Haw. Rev.
Stat. § 487N-1,et seq |
Businesses and gov’t
agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify Hawai‘iOffice of ConsumerProtection and nationalconsumer reportingagencies (Gov’t agencydoes not have to notifyconsumer reportingagencies) | Immediately following discovery of breach | Without unreasonable delay | No |
|
|
Idaho |
Idaho Code
Ann. § 28-51104, et seq |
Individuals, commercial
entities, and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: when agency becomes aware of abreach notify AG within24 hours | Investigation to determine thelikelihood that PIhas been or will bemisused | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Illinois |
815 Ill Comp. Stat.§ 530/5,et seq |
Businesses and gov’t
agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if business and over 500 residents, notify AG and if gov’t agency and over 250 residents, notify AG within 45 days, and if gov’t agency and over 1,000 persons affected, notify all national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of security breach | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | A violation of the statute is an unlawful practice under the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act |
|
Indiana |
Individuals: Ind. Code§ 24-4.9-1-1,et seq |
Individuals and businesses who:
|
|
Yes: notify AG and if over 1,000 residents,notify national consumer reporting agencies | Breach where unencrypted PIwas or may havebeen acquired byunauthorized personor encrypted PI wasor may have beenacquired by anunauthorized personwith access to theencryption key | Without unreasonable delay, but not more than 45 days after discovery of breach | No |
|
| Gov’t AgenciesInd. Code§ 4-1-11-1,et seq |
Gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery of breach where PI was or isreasonably believedto be acquired byunauthorized person | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Statute silent | |
|
Iowa |
Iowa Code § 715C.1,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 500 residents, notify the Director of Consumer Protection Division of the Office of AG within 5 business days of giving notice to resident | Discovery of a breach | Most expeditious manner possible andwithout unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Any violation of the statute is an unlawful practice (Iowa Code § 714.16) and AG may seek damages andequitable relief pursuant to Iowa Code § 714.16(7),including a civil penalty not to exceed $40,000 |
|
Kansas |
Kan. Stat.
Ann. § 50-7a01,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | An investigation to determine likelihoodthat PI has been orwill be misused | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Kentucky |
Individuals: Ky. Rev.Stat. Ann.§ 365.732 |
Persons and businesses who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify all national consumer reporting agencies and credit bureaus | Breach where PI was, or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen, acquired by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute Silent | Statute silent |
| Gov’t Agencies Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann.§ 61.933 |
Gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: within 72 hours notify: Commissioner ofthe KY State Police, Auditor of Public Accounts,and AG. If over 1,000residents notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies See statute for additional requirements forindividual agencies |
Investigation to determine reasonable likelihood ofmisuse of PI |
|
No | AG’s office may bring an action in the Franklin Circuit Court against an agency or a nonaffiliated third partythat is not an agency, or both, for injunctive relief, andfor other legal remedies to enforce the statute | |
|
Louisiana |
La. Stat.
Ann. § 51:3071,et seq.;La. Admin.Code tit.16, pt. III,§ 701 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: notify the Consumer Protection Section of AG’s Office within10 days of notifyingresidents | Discovery of a breach that hasreasonably resultedin unauthorizedacquisition of andaccess to PI | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Yes |
|
|
Maine |
Me. Stat. titl 10§ 1346,et seq. |
Individuals, businesses,
gov’t agencies, and information brokers who:
|
|
Yes: notify appropriate state regulator withinDept. of Professionaland Financial Regulation (if not regulated bythe Dept. then give notice to AG). If over 1,000persons, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Investigation to determine thelikelihood that PIhas been or will bemisused | As expediently as possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Maryland |
Individuals: Md. Code,Com. Law§ 14-3501,et seq. |
Businesses who:
|
|
Yes: notify AG (before notifying residents andeven if investigationdeems notification unnecessary) and if over1,000 residents, notifynational consumerreporting agencies | Investigation to determine the likelihood that PI has been orwill be misused | As soon as reasonably possible, within 45 days | Yes | A violation of the statute is an unfair or deceptive trade practice and is subject to enforcement and penalties provided in Md. Code Commercial Law § 13-301et seq |
| Gov't Agencies: Md. Code,State Gov't.§ 10-1305,et seq |
Gov’t agency, department, board, commission, authority, public
institution of higher education, public corporation unit or instrumentality of the State, or any political subdivision ofthe State who:
|
|
Yes: notify Office of the AG and the Dept. ofInformation Technology;if 1,000 or more individuals, also notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | An investigation to determine whetherthe unauthorizedacquisition of PI hasresulted or is likely toresult in the misuseof the information | As soon as reasonably practicable after investigation | Statute Silent | Statute silent | |
|
Massachusetts |
Mass. Gen. Laws ch.93H, § 1et seq.;201 Mass.Code Regs.17.01,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: notify AG and Director of ConsumerAffairs & BusinessReg. If executive dep’tbreach, notify Information Technology Divisionof Public Records | When a person or agency (1) knows orhas reason to knowof a breach of security or (2) knows orhas reason to knowthat PI was acquiredor used by an unauthorized person orused for an unauthorized purpose | As soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Michigan |
Mich. Comp.
Laws § 445.63;§ 445.72 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery of a breach | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Minnesota |
Individuals: Minn. Stat.§ 325E.61 |
Persons and businesses:
|
|
Yes: if over 500 residents, notify national consumer reportingagencies | Discovery of a breach | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | AG has enforcement powers |
| Gov’t Agencies: Minn. Stat.§ 13.01;§ 13.05,et seq |
Gov’t agencies who:
|
See statute for
definitions of:
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies Note: Eventuallyaffected individual mustbe given a copy of thereport detailing thebreach |
Discovery of the breach where privateconfidential datawas, or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen, acquired by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Yes |
|
|
|
Mississippi |
Miss. Code
Ann. § 75-24-29 |
Individuals and businesses who:
|
|
No | Breach of security, where there is anunauthorized acquisition of PI that hasnot been renderedunreadable or unusable | Without unreasonable delay | No | Failure to comply with the statute constitutes an unfair practice and shall be enforced by AG |
|
Missouri |
Mo. Rev.
Stat. § 407.1500 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify AGand national consumerreporting agencies | Unauthorized access to and unauthorizedacquisition of PI thatcompromises the security, confidentiality,or integrity of the PI | Without unreasonable delay | No | AG has exclusive authority to bring an action for actual damages for a willful and knowing violation andmay seek a civil penalty not to exceed $150,000 persecurity breach or series of breaches of a similar nature(discovered in a single investigation) |
|
Montana |
Individuals: Mont. CodeAnn. § 30-14-1701,et seq. |
Individuals and businesses who:
|
|
No | Discovery of a breach, whereunencrypted PI wasor is reasonablybelieved to havebeen acquired by anunauthorized person | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Statute silent |
| Gov't Agencies: Mont. Code Ann. §2-6-501 |
State agencies or third
parties on behalf ofstate agencies who:
|
|
Yes: simultaneously when issuing notification to affected individuals, send notification to MO’s chief information security officer at dept of administration and AG’s consumer protection office | Discovery or notification of a breach, where PI was orwas reasonablybelieved to havebeen acquired by anunauthorized person | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Statute silent | |
|
Nebraska |
Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 87-801,et seq. |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
No | An investigation and determination thatPI was used, or isreasonably likely tobe used, for an unauthorized purpose | As soon as possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | AG may issue subpoenas and seek and recover direct economic damages for each affected residentinjured by a violation of the statute |
|
Nevada |
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 603A.010,et seq. |
Businesses and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Breach of security where unencryptedPI was, or is reasonably believed to havebeen, acquired by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Statute silent | AG or a district attorney may bring an action to obtain a temporary or permanent injunction against a person who violates, proposes to violate, or has violated the statute |
|
New Hampshire |
N.H. Rev.
Stat. § 359-C:19,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: notify the regulator who has primary authority over the specific trade/commerce(all others notify AG’soffice) and if over 1,000residents, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | A determination of the likelihood that PIhas been or will bemisused | As soon as possible | Yes |
|
|
New Jersey |
N.J. Rev. Stat.§ 56:8-161;§ 56:8-163; § 56:8-166 |
Businesses and gov’t
agencies who:
|
|
Yes: notify Division of State Police in theDept. of Law and Public Safety and if over 1,000 residents, notify national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of a breach, where aresident’s PI was,or is reasonably believed to have been,accessed by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent but see Holmes v. Country wide Fin. Corp., 5:08- CV00205-R, 2012 WL2873892 (W.D. Ky.July 12,2012). |
|
|
New Mexico |
NM St § 57- 12C, et seq. |
Persons who:
|
|
Yes: If over 1,000 New Mexico residents notify AG and major consumer reporting agencies no later than 45 days calendar days following discovery of breach | Discovery of a breach. | Notification shall be made in the most expedient time possible, but no later than 45 calendar days following discovery of the security breach | No |
|
|
New York |
N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law§ 899-aa;N.Y. StateTech. Law§ 208 |
|
|
Yes: notify AG, Dept. of State, and Division of State Police. If over5,000 residents, notify national consumer reporting agencies | Any breach of a security system where PI was, or is reasonably believed to havebeen, acquired by aperson without valid authorization | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
North Carolina |
N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 75-61;§75-65 |
Businesses who:
|
|
Yes: notify Consumer Protection Division ofAG’s Office and if over 1,000 persons, notify national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of a breach | Without unreasonable delay | No unless individual is injured as a result of the violation |
|
|
North Dakota |
N.D. Cent.
Code § 51-30-01,et seq. |
Persons who:
|
|
Yes: Over 250 people notify the AG | Discovery of a breach where PI was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Ohio |
Individuals:
Ohio Rev.Code § 1349.19 |
Individuals and businesses who:
|
|
Yes: over 1,000 residents, notify all consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of a breach where PIwas, or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen, accessed andacquired by anunauthorized person,where there is areasonable beliefof a material risk ofidentity theft or otherfraud | Most expedient time possible but not laterthan 45 daysfollowing discoveryof the breach | Statute silent | AG has investigative powers and right to bring a civil action against any person who fails to comply with thestatute |
|
Gov't Agencies: Ohio
Rev. Code §1347.12 |
Any state agency or
agency of a politicalsubdivision who:
|
|
Yes: over 1,000 residents, notify all consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of any breach where PIwas, or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen accessedand acquired by anunauthorized personif the access andacquisition by theunauthorized personcauses or reasonablyis believed to causea material risk ofidentity theft or otherfaud to a resident ofthis state | Most expedient time possible but notlater than 45 daysfollowing discoveryof the breach | Statute silent | AG, pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code § § 1349.191 and 1349.192, may conduct an investigation and bring acivil action upon an alleged failure by a state agencyor agency of a political subdivision to comply with therequirements of this section | |
|
Oklahoma |
Individuals: Okla. Stat.tit. 24,§ 161, et seq. |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
No | Discovery of a breach whereunencrypted and unredacted PI was or isreasonably believedto have been accessed and acquiredby an unauthorizedperson and there isa reasonable beliefidentify theft or fraudhas occurred or willoccur | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
| Gov't Agencies: Okla. Stat.§ 74-3113.1 |
Any state agency or
agency of a politicalsubdivision.
|
|
No | Discovery or notification of the breach or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen acquired by anunauthorized person. | In the most expedient time possible without unreasonable delay. | Statute silent | Statute Silent | |
|
Oregon |
Rev.
Stat. § 46A.600;§ 46A.602;§ 46A.604;§ 46A.624;§ 46A.626 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 250 individuals, notify AG, if over 1,000 residents, notify all national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery of a breach, i.e., an unauthorized acquisitionof computerizeddata that materiallycompromises the security, confidentiality,or integrity of PI | Discovery of a breach, i.e., an unau- thorized acquisition of computerized data that materially compromises the se- curity, confidentiality, or integrity of PI |
Possibly, see
Or. Rev.Stat. § 646A.624(4) |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
73 Pa. Stat. § 2301,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 persons, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery of a security breach,where unencryptedand unredacted PIwas or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen accessed andacquired by an unauthorized person | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | A violation of the statute is an unfair or deceptive act or practice and AG has exclusive authority to bring anaction |
|
Rhode Island |
11 R.I. Gen.
Laws § 11-49.2-1,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
No | Discovery of a breach where PI isreasonably believedto have been,acquired by anunauthorized person | Most expedient time possible but no laterthan 45 days afterthe confirmation ofthe breach | Statute silent |
|
|
South Carolina |
S.C. Code
Ann. § 39-1-90 |
Persons who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 residents, notify Consumer Protection Division ofthe Dept. of ConsumerAffairs and nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery of a breach where PIwas, or is reasonablybelieved to havebeen, acquired by anunauthorized personand there is a material risk of harm to theresident | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Yes | A person who knowingly and willfully violates the statute is subject to a $1,000 administrative fine foreach resident whose information was accessible byreason of the breach, with the total amount decided bythe Dept. of Consumer Affairs |
|
South Dakota |
S.D Codified Laws § § 22 40-19 to26 |
Person or business that:
|
|
Yes: if over 250 people notify the AG and all consumer reporting agencies. | Discovery of breach if there is a rea- sonable belief that personal or PI has been acquired by an unauthorized person | No later than 60 days from discovery. | Statute Silent | |
|
Tennessee |
Tenn. Code
Ann. § 47-18-2107 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 persons, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery of a breach where PI isreasonably believedto have been,acquired by an unauthorized person | Immediately but no later than 45 daysfollowing the discovery or notification tocovered entity of asecurity breach | Yes | Violations fall unter the Tennessee Consumer protection act and are an unfair or deceptive act |
|
Texas |
Tex. Bus. &
Com. Code § 521.002;§ 521.053;§ 521.151 |
Persons who:
|
|
Yes: if over 10,000 persons, notify national consumer reportingagencies | Yes: if over 10,000 per- sons, notify all national consumer reporting agencies and if over 250 residents notify AG no later than 30 days after discovery of breach | Within 60 days after breach is deter- mined and without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Utah |
Utah Code § 13-44-101;§ 13-44-202;§ 13-44-301 |
Persons who:
|
|
Yes: if 500 or more residents, notify AG and Utah Cyber Center and if 1,000 or more notify all consumer reporting agencies | An investigation to determine likelihood that PI has been or will be misused for identity theft or fraud purposes | Most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay | No |
|
|
Vermont |
Vt .Stat.
Ann. Tit. 9§ 2430;§ 2435 |
Businesses and gov’t
agencies who:
|
|
Yes: notify AG within 14 days, if regulated by Dept of Financial Regulation notify the dept, and if over 1,000 residents, notify all national consumer reporting agencies | Discovery or notification of a breach | With the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, but not later than 45 days after discovery of the breach or notification | Statute silent | Dept. of Financial Regulation, AG, and the state's attorney have sole and full authority to investigatepotential violations and to enforce, prosecute, obtain,and impose remedies |
|
Virginia |
Va. Code
Ann. § 18.2-186.6 |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 persons, notify AG and national consumer reporting agencies | A reasonable belief that unencryptedor unredacted PI was accessed and acquired by an unauthorized person which causes, or the individual or entity reasonably believes will cause, identity theft or fraud | Without unreasonable delay | Yes | AG may impose a civil penalty not to exceed $150,000 per breach of the security of the system or aseries of breaches of a similar nature that are discovered in a single investigation |
|
Va. Code
Ann. § 32.1-127.1:05 |
Gov’t agencies who:
|
See Va. Code § 32.1-127.1:05 |
Yes: notify AG and Commissioner ofHealth. | If unencrypted or unredacted medicalinformation was or isreasonably believedto have been accessed and acquiredby an unauthorizedperson | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | Statute silent | |
|
Washington |
Individuals: Wash. Rev. Code § 19.255, et seq. |
Persons and businesses who:
|
|
No | Discovery of a breach | Most expedient time possible and withoutunreasonable delay | Yes | Any business that violates, proposes to violate, or has violated the statute may be enjoined |
| Gov't agencies: Wash. Rev. Code§ 42.56.590,et seq |
Gov’t agencyies who:
|
|
Yes: if more than 500 residents, must notify the AG no more than 30 days after breach discovered | Following discovery where PI was, or is reasonably believed to have been acquired by an unauthorized person | Most expedient time possible and without unreason- able delay, no more than 30 days after the breach was dis- covered | Yes | Any agency that violates or proposes to violate this section may be enjoined | |
|
West Virginia |
W. Va. Code § 46A-2A101,et seq |
Individuals, businesses,
and gov’t agencies who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 persons, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Discovery or notification of a breach, where unencrypted and un- redacted PI was or is reasonably believed to have been accessed and acquired by an unauthorized person and is reasonably likely to lead to identity theft or fraud | Without unreasonable delay | Statute silent |
|
|
Wisconsin |
Wis. Stat. § 134.98 |
Businesses who:
|
|
Yes: if over 1,000 persons, notify nationalconsumer reportingagencies | Business’ knowledge that PI, in its possession, hasbeen acquired by anunauthorized person | A reasonable time not to exceed 45days | Statute silent | Statute silent |
|
Wyoming |
Wyo. Stat.
Ann. § 40-12-501,et seq. |
Individuals and commercial entities who:
|
|
No | An investigation to determine thelikelihood that PIhas been or will bemisused | As soon as possible, in the most expedient time possibleand without unreasonable delay | Statute silent | AG may bring an action in law or equity to address any violation and for other relief that may be appropriate to ensure proper compliance, to recover damages,or both |
Disclaimer: This survey is current as of 5/2018. This material is made available for general informational purposes only. The field of insurance law is ever-evolving, and courts may change their views at any time. Readers are advised to independently verify the information contained herein. This material is not intended to, and does not constitute, legal advice, nor is it intended to constitute a solicitation for the formation of an attorney-client relationship.
For more information or questions on cyber risk strategies, please contact us at [email protected].