<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: California&#8217;s New Privacy &amp; Breach Notification Law: SB 20</title> <atom:link href="http://arielsilverstone.com/privacy/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/</link> <description>Intelligent Business Security</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:03:09 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>By: Richard Brumfield</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-484</link> <dc:creator>Richard Brumfield</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-484</guid> <description>&lt;blockquote cite=&quot;#commentbody-379&quot;&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-379&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Ariel &lt;/a&gt; :&lt;/strong&gt;Good questions, Joseph!
Soâ€¦ here is the answers, and they are not (yet) straight answers: SB 20 is not yet law. It would replace sections and 1798.82 of the California Civil Code. I read and re-read andâ€¦. well, you get the point, but &lt;strong&gt;1798.82 does not seem to have any penalties associated with it&lt;/strong&gt;. It somewhat continues in 1798.83, and then 1798.84 &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; specify penalties, but calls them out &lt;strong&gt;only&lt;/strong&gt; for violations of 1798.83! So, I placed a call to the California Attorney Generalâ€™s office and am awaiting an official reply. I will post it here. But please remember: I am not a lawyer. For legal advice I suggest you contact an attorney.
Ariel&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Have the Attorney General Office gotten back in touch with you on the quoted question?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote
cite="#commentbody-379"><p> <strong><a
href="#comment-379" rel="nofollow">Ariel </a> :</strong>Good questions, Joseph!<br
/> Soâ€¦ here is the answers, and they are not (yet) straight answers: SB 20 is not yet law. It would replace sections and 1798.82 of the California Civil Code. I read and re-read andâ€¦. well, you get the point, but <strong>1798.82 does not seem to have any penalties associated with it</strong>. It somewhat continues in 1798.83, and then 1798.84 <strong>does</strong> specify penalties, but calls them out <strong>only</strong> for violations of 1798.83! So, I placed a call to the California Attorney Generalâ€™s office and am awaiting an official reply. I will post it here. But please remember: I am not a lawyer. For legal advice I suggest you contact an attorney.<br
/> Ariel</p></blockquote><p>Have the Attorney General Office gotten back in touch with you on the quoted question?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Joseph Hewitt</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-396</link> <dc:creator>Joseph Hewitt</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-396</guid> <description>Ariel,It looks like the new SB 20 would require the notification to the Attorney General, which would then put the notifying company in to the pentalty part of section 4057 of the California Financial Information Privacy Act, right?  So, it&#039;s more of a round about penalty.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ariel,</p><p>It looks like the new SB 20 would require the notification to the Attorney General, which would then put the notifying company in to the pentalty part of section 4057 of the California Financial Information Privacy Act, right?  So, it&#8217;s more of a round about penalty.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ariel</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-398</link> <dc:creator>Ariel</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-398</guid> <description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-379&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@Ariel &lt;/a&gt;
OK, here goes.   The official reply by the California State Attorney General&#039;s office:&lt;blockquote&gt;The penalty for 1798.82 lies with 1798.84 ...  1798.84 provides that &quot;any customer injured by a violation of this title may institute a civil action to recover damages.&quot;   &quot;Any business that violates, proposes to violate, or has violated this title may be enjoined.&quot;  (1798.84(e).)  1798.82 is part of the Title 1.81, so it is included.
By contrast, 1798.84 provides that civil penalties are only available to consumers for violations of for 1798.83, w/o referencing 1798.82. (See 1798.84(c).)   So, the blogger is correct regarding the unavailability of penalties under 1798.84 for violation of 1798.82.  However, if he meets the standing requirements, he could bring an action for violation of Bus. &amp; Prof. Code section 17200 for violation of 1798.82, but only for injunctive relief, not penalties.  We, as law enforcement, can bring a section 17200 action seeking injunctive relief and penalties for violation of 1798.82. &lt;/blockquote&gt;</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a
href="#comment-379" rel="nofollow">@Ariel </a><br
/> OK, here goes.   The official reply by the California State Attorney General&#8217;s office:</p><blockquote><p>The penalty for 1798.82 lies with 1798.84 &#8230;  1798.84 provides that &#8220;any customer injured by a violation of this title may institute a civil action to recover damages.&#8221;   &#8220;Any business that violates, proposes to violate, or has violated this title may be enjoined.&#8221;  (1798.84(e).)  1798.82 is part of the Title 1.81, so it is included.</p><p>By contrast, 1798.84 provides that civil penalties are only available to consumers for violations of for 1798.83, w/o referencing 1798.82. (See 1798.84(c).)   So, the blogger is correct regarding the unavailability of penalties under 1798.84 for violation of 1798.82.  However, if he meets the standing requirements, he could bring an action for violation of Bus. &#038; Prof. Code section 17200 for violation of 1798.82, but only for injunctive relief, not penalties.  We, as law enforcement, can bring a section 17200 action seeking injunctive relief and penalties for violation of 1798.82.</p></blockquote> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ariel</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-379</link> <dc:creator>Ariel</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-379</guid> <description>Good questions, Joseph!So... here is the answers, and they are not (yet) straight answers:  SB 20 is not yet law.  It would replace sections and 1798.82 of the California Civil Code.   I read and re-read and.... well, you get the point, but &lt;strong&gt;1798.82 does not seem to have any penalties associated with it&lt;/strong&gt;.   It somewhat continues in 1798.83, and then 1798.84 &lt;strong&gt;does&lt;/strong&gt; specify penalties, but calls them out &lt;strong&gt;only&lt;/strong&gt; for violations of 1798.83!   So, I placed a call to the California Attorney General&#039;s office and am awaiting an official reply.   I will post it here.   But please remember: I am not a lawyer.  For legal advice I suggest you contact an attorney.Ariel</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good questions, Joseph!</p><p>So&#8230; here is the answers, and they are not (yet) straight answers:  SB 20 is not yet law.  It would replace sections and 1798.82 of the California Civil Code.   I read and re-read and&#8230;. well, you get the point, but <strong>1798.82 does not seem to have any penalties associated with it</strong>.   It somewhat continues in 1798.83, and then 1798.84 <strong>does</strong> specify penalties, but calls them out <strong>only</strong> for violations of 1798.83!   So, I placed a call to the California Attorney General&#8217;s office and am awaiting an official reply.   I will post it here.   But please remember: I am not a lawyer.  For legal advice I suggest you contact an attorney.</p><p>Ariel</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ariel</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-378</link> <dc:creator>Ariel</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-378</guid> <description>Thank you for the reference!Ariel</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the reference!</p><p>Ariel</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Joseph Hewitt</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-377</link> <dc:creator>Joseph Hewitt</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-377</guid> <description>Hi Ariel,I&#039;m currently looking for penalties and fines related to many of these types of regulations.  However, beyond the costs associated with notification, I don&#039;t see anything that constitutes a fine or right to private action.  Do you know of any examples where a company or executive was fined for non-compliance with SB 1386 or anything newer in CA?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ariel,</p><p>I&#8217;m currently looking for penalties and fines related to many of these types of regulations.  However, beyond the costs associated with notification, I don&#8217;t see anything that constitutes a fine or right to private action.  Do you know of any examples where a company or executive was fined for non-compliance with SB 1386 or anything newer in CA?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: California New Privacy &#38; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 &#8230; &#124; Daily News Headlines</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-376</link> <dc:creator>California New Privacy &#38; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 &#8230; &#124; Daily News Headlines</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-376</guid> <description>[...] is the original post: California New Privacy &amp; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 &#8230;   Share and [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is the original post: California New Privacy &amp; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 &#8230;   Share and [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ariel</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-374</link> <dc:creator>Ariel</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-374</guid> <description>Thank you kindly, Manu.  You are absolutely right!   As often is the case when good intentions meet political expediency, some details got &quot;mangled&quot;.Ariel</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you kindly, Manu.  You are absolutely right!   As often is the case when good intentions meet political expediency, some details got &#8220;mangled&#8221;.</p><p>Ariel</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Manu Namboodiri</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-373</link> <dc:creator>Manu Namboodiri</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-373</guid> <description>Excellent analysis! I agree with the devil in details arguments.. Always seems the case that clarifications are never enough! One point I would argue is whether app specific data is a form of encryption - I would say it is not. Easy to get an app to open a file. I also like the phrase in the law that mentions &quot;unencrypted&quot; - which can imply that if the data was encrypted and you left the keys lying around, it does not count!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent analysis! I agree with the devil in details arguments.. Always seems the case that clarifications are never enough! One point I would argue is whether app specific data is a form of encryption &#8211; I would say it is not. Easy to get an app to open a file. I also like the phrase in the law that mentions &#8220;unencrypted&#8221; &#8211; which can imply that if the data was encrypted and you left the keys lying around, it does not count!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Tweets that mention California New Privacy &#38; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 : Intelligent Business Security &#124; The Security Blog -- Topsy.com</title><link>http://arielsilverstone.com/security/california-breach-notification-law-sb-20/comment-page-1/#comment-369</link> <dc:creator>Tweets that mention California New Privacy &#38; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 : Intelligent Business Security &#124; The Security Blog -- Topsy.com</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arielsilverstone.com/?p=3050#comment-369</guid> <description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ariel Silverstone, Ariel Silverstone, Ariel Silverstone, SilverstoneAand others. SilverstoneA said: New post: Ariel Analyzing California New Privacy &amp; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 http://tinyurl.com/qttcnx [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ariel Silverstone, Ariel Silverstone, Ariel Silverstone, SilverstoneAand others. SilverstoneA said: New post: Ariel Analyzing California New Privacy &amp; Breach Notification Law: SB 20 <a
href="http://tinyurl.com/qttcnx" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/qttcnx</a> [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Served from: arielsilverstone.com @ 2012-05-21 16:25:32 by W3 Total Cache -->
