Oklahoma recently enacted Senate Bill 626, which substantially amends the state’s data breach notification law to broaden the scope of notification obligations and add a new regulator notification requirement along with a new “safe harbor”-style provision that provides liability protections if certain security measures are implemented. The changes to Oklahoma’s law follow changes to other state data breach notification laws within the past year, including New York’s addition of a 30-day deadline for notice to individuals (added in early 2025) and Pennsylvania’s addition of a regulator notification requirement and obligations to provide free credit monitoring (added in mid-2024). Key updates from Oklahoma’s bill, which will go into effect on January 1, 2026, are discussed in further detail below.Continue Reading Oklahoma Substantially Amends Its Data Breach Notification Statute
Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute
Following the approach taken by the Kentucky and Connecticut legislatures this spring, Oregon has amended its comprehensive privacy statute to implement changes to the law. Specifically, the amendment extends the statutory cure period to July 1, 2026, but this extension is limited to certain controllers. Beginning on January 1, 2026, the statute’s cure provision will only apply to controllers that are a “noncommercial educational broadcast station, as defined in 47 U.S.C. 397” and that (1) receive funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and (2) distribute the entity’s journalism content without cost to recipients. Continue Reading Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute
White House Issues New Cybersecurity Executive Order
On June 6, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (“Sustaining Select Efforts to Strengthen the Nation’s Cybersecurity and Amending Executive Order 13694 and Executive Order 14144”) (the “Order”) that modifies certain initiatives in prior Executive Orders issued by Presidents Obama and Biden and highlights key cybersecurity priorities for the current Administration. Specifically, the Order (i) directs that existing federal government regulations and policy be revised to focus on securing third-party software supply chains, quantum cryptography, artificial intelligence, and Internet of Things (“IoT”) devices and (ii) more expressly focuses cybersecurity-related sanctions authorities on “foreign” persons. Although the Order makes certain changes to prior cybersecurity related Executive Orders issued under previous administrations, it generally leaves the framework of those Executive Orders in place. Further, it does not appear to modify other cybersecurity Executive Orders.[1] To that end, although the Order highlights some areas where the Trump administration has taken a different approach than prior administrations, it also signals a more general alignment between administrations on core cybersecurity principles.Continue Reading White House Issues New Cybersecurity Executive Order
NIST Publishes Updated Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations
Earlier in April, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) published Special Publication (“SP”) 800-61, Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management, Revision 3 (“NIST SP 800-61”). NIST SP 800-61 Revision 3 (“Revision 3”) is a significant change, as it not only represents the first update of the document since 2012, but also now maps the document’s recommendations and considerations for incident response to the six functions outlined in the recently-updated NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0—Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. As a result, Revision 3 includes significant new recommendations and guidance for incident response, and entities should consider reviewing and updating their incident response plans and procedures to incorporate these recommendations, particularly if an entity has aligned its cybersecurity program with the NIST Cybersecurity Framework or used the prior versions of NIST SP 800-61 as a basis for existing incident response plans or procedures.Continue Reading NIST Publishes Updated Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations
Montana Passes Amendments to Consumer Data Privacy Act
On April 15, 2025, the Montana legislature unanimously passed Montana SB 297, a bill that would amend the Montana Consumer Data Privacy Act (“MTCDPA”) with provisions expanding online data protections for minors, narrowing the exemptions under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and removing a controller’s right to cure, among others. We outline some key provisions below.Continue Reading Montana Passes Amendments to Consumer Data Privacy Act
California Privacy Protection Agency Takes Next Step on New Automated Decision-Making Regulations and Privacy Risk Assessments
At its March 8, 2024 meeting, the Board of the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) moved, by a 3-2 vote, to advance proposed regulations addressing automated decision-making technology (“ADMT”) and risk assessments for the processing of personal information. Notably, the Board’s vote only allows staff to begin paperwork preliminary to a rulemaking; it did not actually initiate the formal rulemaking process. At the meeting, the CPPA Staff clarified that the Board will need to re-review the draft rules for ADMT, privacy risk assessments, and cyber audits and vote again to initiate the rulemaking process. The CPPA’s General Counsel Philip Laird said he expects the Board will vote to begin the formal rulemaking process for all three topics in July 2024, at the earliest. Once formal rulemaking begins, the Board has one year to finalize the regulations, per California’s Administrative Procedure Act.Continue Reading California Privacy Protection Agency Takes Next Step on New Automated Decision-Making Regulations and Privacy Risk Assessments