47 State Cybersecurity Breach Laws May be Replaced by Federal Law



Ten_Badge_Small (1)

At a Senate hearing on cyberinsurance regarding notice to cyber victims there was testimony about a uniform federal cybersecurity breach law to replace the laws in 47 states which could help by having a uniform standard could “reduce the cost of breach responses and enhance consumer protection.” The Senate Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance, and Data Security began examining cybersecurity with two hearings in February:

The first hearing examined the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s partnership with the private sector to improve critical infrastructure cybersecurity. NIST’s continuing role was codified in S. 1353, the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-274), originally introduced by Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) and former Chairman Rockefeller (D-W.Va.).

The second hearing informed Committee efforts in crafting a federal data breach bill. Sen. Moran’s hearing on Thursday [March 19, 2015] will continue the Committee’s examination of cybersecurity issues.

At the March 19, 2015 hearing reported that Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) said that cyber insurance:

…may be a market-led approach to help businesses improve their cyber security posture by tying policy eligibility or lower premiums to better cyber security practices.

Replacing the 47 states notification laws should help consumers who rely on cyberinsurance for these breaches, but only if the legislation is well drafted and considered.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.


AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top