\t\t\t\tSB20<\/a> didn\u2019t go through because it would have imposed a larger procedure for breach responses; yet, the bill lacked \u201cteeth\u201d.\u00a0 Most privacy advocates disagree with\u00a0Governor Schwarzenegger\u00a0that there weren’t additional consumer benefits.\n\n\n
BILL NUMBER: SB 20\n VETOED\tDATE: 10\/11\/2009\nTo the Members of the California State Senate:\nI am returning Senate Bill 20 without my signature.\nThis bill would require any agency, person, or business that must\nissue an information security breach notification pursuant to\nexisting law to also fulfill certain additional requirements\npertaining to the security breach notification.\nCalifornia's landmark law on data breach notification has had many\nbeneficial results. Informing individuals whose personal information\nwas compromised in a breach of what their risks are and what they\ncan do to protect themselves is an important consumer protection\nbenefit. This bill is unnecessary, however, because there is no\nevidence that there is a problem with the information provided to\nconsumers. Moreover, there is no additional consumer benefit gained\nby requiring the Attorney General to become a repository of breach\nnotices when this measure does not require the Attorney General to do\nanything with the notices. Since this measure would place\nadditional unnecessary mandates on businesses without a corresponding\nconsumer benefit, I am unable to sign this bill.\nSincerely,\nArnold Schwarzenegger<\/pre>\n\n]]>\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"amazonpipp_noncename":"","amazon-product-isactive":"","amazon-product-single-asin":"","amazon-product-content-location":"","amazon-product-content-hook-override":"","amazon-product-excerpt-hook-override":"","amazon-product-singular-only":"","amazon-product-amazon-desc":"","amazon-product-show-gallery":"","amazon-product-show-features":"","amazon-product-newwindow":"","amazon-product-show-list-price":"","amazon-product-show-used-price":"","amazon-product-show-saved-amt":"","amazon-product-timestamp":"","amazon-product-new-title":"","amazon-product-use-cartURL":"","amazon_featured_post_meta_key":"","_amazon_featured_alt":"","amazon-product-template":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[66,67],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-129","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-breaches","category-practices"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=129"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8343,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129\/revisions\/8343"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=129"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=129"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.infosecurity.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=129"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}