Are you Confused about the new IoT Security Law?

24 September 2019 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

Darkreading.com reported that the new January 1, 2020 IoT Security Law in California applies to companies “…that make connected devices — from Internet routers to connected thermostats to home-monitoring cameras…”  The Article entitled “California's IoT Security Law Causing Confusion” included these comments:

The California law, Senate Bill 327, was approved by the governor a year ago and requires that all connected devices sold in the state— no matter where they are made — incorporate "a reasonable security feature or features" that appropriately protect the user of the product and the user's data from unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure.

The law specifies that single hard-coded passwords are not allowed, and each device must either have a unique passcode or require the user to generate a new passcode before using the device for the first time.

The California law is not the only legislation to target the security of connected devices.

With 25 billion devices expected to be part of the global IoT landscape, legislators are subjecting IoT manufacturers to increasing scrutiny.

Given the new California Consumer Privacy Act that goes into effect on January 1, 2020 also there are lots of issues to be concerned about:

The enactment of the CCPA will be a watershed moment for data privacy not just in California, but also throughout the United States,…

Since any applicable business across the country and indeed across the globe that serves consumers in California will be required to abide by the law, companies across the board will likely be gearing up for compliance.

Are you ready?

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Insights