DataBreaches.Net

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

Some comments on the Florida Information Protection Act of 2014

Posted on June 23, 2014 by Dissent

The Florida Information Protection Act of 2014 was approved by Governor Rick Scott on June 20. It has some commendable features (not all of which are new under Florida law), but I also spot some concerns.

On a positive note:

1. It uses an access trigger instead of an acquisition trigger for notification.

2. It now includes other types of information in its definition of “personal information,” including “A user name or e-mail address, in combination with a password or security question and answer that would permit access to an online account.”

3. It requires notice of a breach to the Department of Legal Affairs if the breach affects 500 or more individuals in Florida. That gives us another centralized database to FOI.

4. It requires data security:

Each covered entity, governmental entity, or third-party agent shall take reasonable measures to protect and secure data in electronic form containing personal information.

5. It imposes duties on third-party agents to notify covered entities of a breach within 10 days and shortens the timeframe for covered entities to notify consumers from 45 days to 30 days, although entities can get an extension.

6. It requires reasonable measures to dispose, or arrange for the disposal, of customer records containing personal information when the records are no longer to be retained; and

7. It treats violations as unfair or deceptive trade practices, and covered entities or third-party agencies could face monetary penalties of up to $500,000.

On a negative note:

1. A breach is defined in terms of electronic data, and this law does not seem to apply to paper records.

2. The law says that notification to individuals is

not required if, after an appropriate investigation and consultation with relevant federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies, the covered entity reasonably determines that the breach has not and will not likely result in identity theft or any other financial harm to the individuals whose personal information has been accessed.

3. The law does not require any mitigation other than notice to the individuals (if the entity does not determine that there is no likely risk of ID theft or financial harm).

3. The law does not create any private cause of action.

No related posts.

Category: State/Local

Post navigation

← $800,000 HIPAA settlement in medical records dumping case
Michael Schumacher's medical files stolen – report →

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

  • Terrible tales of opsec oversights: How cybercrooks get themselves caught
  • International Criminal Court hit with cyber attack during NATO summit
  • Pembroke Regional Hospital reported canceling appointments due to service delays from “an incident”
  • Iran-linked hackers threaten to release emails allegedly stolen from Trump associates
  • National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
  • Swiss Health Foundation Radix Hit by Cyberattack Affecting Federal Data
  • Russian hackers get 7 and 5 years in prison for large-scale cyber attacks with ransomware, over 60 million euros in bitcoins seized
  • Bolton Walk-In Clinic patient data leak locked down (finally!)
  • 50 Customers of French Bank Hit by Insider SIM Swap Scam
  • Ontario health agency atHome ordered to inform 200,000 patients of March data breach

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

  • The Trump administration is building a national citizenship data system
  • Supreme Court Decision on Age Verification Tramples Free Speech and Undermines Privacy
  • New Jersey Issues Draft Privacy Regulations: The New
  • Hacker helped kill FBI sources, witnesses in El Chapo case, according to watchdog report
  • Germany Wants Apple, Google to Remove DeepSeek From Their App Stores
  • Supreme Court upholds Texas law requiring age verification on porn sites
  • Justices nix Medicaid ‘right’ to choose doctor, defunding Planned Parenthood in South Carolina

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[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.