DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Data-Breach Disclosures May Decline 50% Under Proposed Bills

Posted on August 2, 2011 by Dissent

Corporate disclosures of data breaches involving U.S. consumers’ personal information may fall by 50 percent under legislation before Congress.

House and Senate lawmakers have introduced at least five data-security bills this year requiring businesses to notify customers of intrusions if there is a “reasonable risk” that personal data including credit-card and Social Security numbers may have been stolen.

The measures, which don’t define the reasonable risk that triggers a mandatory notification, would supplant laws in 13 jurisdictions including California and Texas that obligate companies to disclose any breach of a system storing personal information.

“A national bill with a harm threshold will likely lead to less notification because the trigger to report has been raised,” Aaron Simpson, a privacy lawyer and partner at Hunton & Williams LLP in New York, said in an interview with Bloomberg Government.

Read more from Bloomberg on SFGate.com


Related:

  • US company with access to biggest telecom firms uncovers breach by nation-state hackers
  • The 4TB time bomb: when EY's cloud went public (and what it taught us)
  • China Amends Cybersecurity Law and Incident Reporting Regime to Address AI and Infrastructure Risks
  • Some lower-tier ransomware gangs have formed a new RaaS alliance -- or have they? (1)
  • Another plastic surgery practice fell prey to a cyberattack that acquired patient photos and info
  • How a hacking gang held Italy’s political elites to ransom
Category: Commentaries and AnalysesFederalLegislationOf Note

Post navigation

← New River Health Association breach highlights a source of confusion in HHS breach tool
AU: Hacked firms could be held responsible for privacy breaches →

2 thoughts on “Data-Breach Disclosures May Decline 50% Under Proposed Bills”

  1. Rex Uranus says:
    August 10, 2011 at 9:33 am

    Under what theory of Separation of Powers would a Federal law “supplant” state laws on this topic?

    Please indicate which Article and Section of the United States Constitution grants authority over this topic to the Federal government, over-riding the 10th Amendment’s directive that “all powers not delegated to the United States … are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people”?

    Federal supremacy over the states is a MYTH propagated by usurpers in the Federal government. It’s time we exposed such claims for the power-grabs that they are. Shame on the author for playing along!

    1. glenn says:
      August 18, 2011 at 11:24 am

      see the Dormant commerce clause, effectively granting congress the right to regulate interstate commerce, and the way it has been interpreted over the years, it means congress gets to regulate, uh, well, everything it wants to 🙂

      However, data breach laws really should fall within the purview of interstate commerce. Any time congress pre-empts state law, it raises and lowers the bar at the same time, depending on the state law it preempts.

      not saying I agree with the power grab, but it’s been that way for a really long time

Comments are closed.

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.