The New York Attorney General’s Office recently settled with Albany ENT & Allergy Services over claims that the healthcare provider failed to protect over 200,000 consumers’ private health information. The claims stem from two ransomware attacks in 2023. The AG argued that the company had violated New York’s data security law, resulting in the incident. As part of the settlement, Albany ENT agreed to pay $2.75 million in civil penalties and to implement additional security measures.Continue Reading New York AG Settles EnforcemENT Action with ENT
Data Security
Amendments to NYDFS’ Cybersecurity Regulations Take Effect November 1
The New York Department of Financial Services has modified its cybersecurity requirements for regulated entities. These requirements are in addition to those included in the regulations as last updated in November of last year. The new requirements go into effect November 1, 2024. They modify several parts of the rule, including:Continue Reading Amendments to NYDFS’ Cybersecurity Regulations Take Effect November 1
NYDFS Speaks Out on AI and its Cybersecurity Risks
The New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”) recently published guidance on managing cyber risks related to AI for the financial services and insurance industry. Though the circular letter does not introduce any per se “new” obligations, the guidance speaks to the Agency’s expectations for addressing AI within its existing cybersecurity regulations. Continue Reading NYDFS Speaks Out on AI and its Cybersecurity Risks
Camera Company Will Pay $2.95 Million to Settle Security Claims
Verkada, a manufacturer and retailer of security cameras, has settled FTC accusations of lax security measures. The company sells its products to businesses, including schools and medical facilities. It markets its products as “plug and play:” the cameras connect to the cloud and allow customers’ remote access into both live and archived video footage. Among other features, the cameras have a “people analytics” tool that lets users “search images through facial recognition or face-matching technology.” A review of the settlement raises many reminders for companies about (1) security claims in privacy policies and marketing, (2) remediation concerns following a breach, (3) adherence to the Privacy Shield, and (4) a reminder about related (and often overlooked) laws like CAN-SPAM.Continue Reading Camera Company Will Pay $2.95 Million to Settle Security Claims
SEC Continues its Cybersecurity Focus, Settles with Company over Lax Security Measures
The SEC recently issued an order and settlement against a company from a pair of cyberattacks in which millions of dollars of client funds were stolen. While the company was able to recover a portion of the funds and ultimately reimbursed clients for the money lost, the SEC still fined the company $850,000 for failure to provide the necessary safeguards to protect its clients’ funds.Continue Reading SEC Continues its Cybersecurity Focus, Settles with Company over Lax Security Measures
Biotech Company Settles with Three State AGs Over Security Practices
A biotech company recently settled with three AGs over allegations that it had failed to protect consumer information. According to the AGs of Connecticut, New York and New Jersey, this led to a 2023 data incident. The company, Enzo Biochem, agreed to pay a $4.5 million civil penalty and take several steps to modify its information security program.Continue Reading Biotech Company Settles with Three State AGs Over Security Practices
Ring, Ring, it’s the FCC Calling- TracFone to Pay $16M to Settle FCC Investigation
TracFone, the pre-paid phone company, recently settled with the FCC over allegations that the company failed to protect customer information during three different data incidents. According to the FCC, in each of the incidents, threat actors gained access to customer information, including names, addresses, and features to which customers had subscribed. The threat actors were able to gain access by exploiting vulnerabilities in the customer-facing application programming interfaces or APIs.Continue Reading Ring, Ring, it’s the FCC Calling- TracFone to Pay $16M to Settle FCC Investigation
Indiana Amends Breach Notification Law Along with New Adult Website Verification Requirement
Indiana recently amended its breach notification law to include as personal information age verification information collected by adult websites. At the same time, the state passed a new law for adult websites. The law required that these sites use a “reasonable” method to verify users’ ages. The law also creates a private right of action for parents of minors who access the sites. The law has been blocked, however, by a lawsuit arguing it violates First Amendment.Continue Reading Indiana Amends Breach Notification Law Along with New Adult Website Verification Requirement
Keystone State Tweaks its Data Breach Notification Law Again
In what may become an annual tradition, Pennsylvania has amended its breach notification law. The new provisions will take effect on September 26, 2024. As a reminder, Pennsylvania changed its law last year to expand the definition of “personal information” and to create exemptions for HIPAA-regulated entities. Continue Reading Keystone State Tweaks its Data Breach Notification Law Again
Impact of Tennessee’s Cybersecurity Class Action Safe Harbor
Tennessee has joined a handful of other states to provide certain safe harbors in the cybersecurity realm. Unlike others, the law sites beside -but does not modify- the states’ data breach notification law. Also unlike others, the safe harbor is very narrowly tailored, and is not triggered by having a data security program.Continue Reading Impact of Tennessee’s Cybersecurity Class Action Safe Harbor
Mid-Year Recap: Think Beyond US State Laws!
Much of the focus on US privacy has been US state laws, and the potential of a federal privacy law. This focus can lead one to forget, however, that US privacy and data security law follows a patchwork approach both at a state level and a federal level. “Comprehensive” privacy laws are thus only one piece of the puzzle. There are federal and state privacy and security laws that apply based on a company’s (1) industry (financial services, health care, telecommunications, gaming, etc.), (2) activity (making calls, sending emails, collecting information at point of purchase, etc.), and (3) the type of individual from whom information is being collected (children, students, employees, etc.). There have been developments this year in each of these areas.Continue Reading Mid-Year Recap: Think Beyond US State Laws!