California breach notification lookup
Use this California breach notification lookup as an incident-triage clock, not as legal advice. It shows the fields Policywright has verified for California: statute citation, stated notification deadline, residents or regulators who may need notice, consumer-reporting-agency threshold, consumer-notice trigger, official source links, and the last verified date.
Last verified 2026-08-12. Not legal advice.
| Field | Verified value | Use in the incident file |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.82 | Link the decision record to the official citation |
| Deadline | Within 30 calendar days of discovery or notification of the breach, subject to law-enforcement delay or time needed to determine scope and restore integrity; AG sample notice within 15 calendar days after notifying consumers when more than 500 residents are affected. | Sort multi-state response work by the shortest stated clock |
| Residents | Affected California residents whose covered personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person. | Identify whether affected residents receive notice |
| Regulator | Submit a sample breach notice to the California Attorney General when notice is required for more than 500 California residents. | Record AG or regulator portal review |
| Consumer-reporting agencies | California Civil Code § 1798.82 requires consumer-reporting-agency contact information in certain notices involving Social Security, driver license, or California identification card numbers; review the statute for the exact notice content. | Check whether the affected count crosses a CRA threshold |
| Consumer trigger | California notices must use plain language and include specific headings and content; businesses notifying more than 500 California residents must submit a sample notice to the Attorney General within 15 calendar days after notifying consumers. | Tie notice analysis to the statutory trigger, not an unsupported assumption |
What this state lookup shows
California fields are rendered from the verified state dataset only when the field exists. No deadline is inferred when the data does not state one.
Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.82 is the statute citation retained for this lookup, and the state page links to the official statute source when available.
California notices must use plain language and include specific headings and content; businesses notifying more than 500 California residents must submit a sample notice to the Attorney General within 15 calendar days after notifying consumers. The consumer trigger matters because the clock usually starts only after a legally meaningful incident analysis, not merely because an IT alert appeared.
The last verified date for this California lookup is 2026-08-12. Use that date as a prompt to refresh counsel review before making a live notification decision.
How to use it during an incident
Start with containment and evidence preservation, then identify affected resident states and compare the shortest stated deadline first.
A practical incident file should record discovery time, encryption status, systems involved, affected consumer count, vendor involvement, and the person responsible for counsel review.
For California, the WISP should say where the notification decision log lives, who contacts counsel, who checks the regulator portal, and who approves any consumer notice before it is sent.
This lookup pairs with the Incident Response Plan because the plan owns the workflow: intake, escalation, containment, preservation, notice analysis, communications, and final review.
How it fits the WISP
A WISP should not guess at state-law outcomes; it should make the breach-review path fast, documented, and source-linked.
Pair this lookup with the California WISP requirements page so the firm's written program names the state-aware incident path before an event happens.
Policywright keeps the breach clock separate from the policy packet: the lookup tells you what to review, while the generated packet assigns owners, evidence records, remediation steps, and review cadence.
Not legal advice. A qualified lawyer should confirm whether the incident facts meet a statutory definition, whether substitute notice or regulator notice applies, and whether another state or federal rule changes the timeline.
FAQ
Is this California lookup legal advice?
No. It is a source-linked lookup for incident planning and should be reviewed with qualified counsel before relying on it in a live notification decision.
What if affected residents live outside California?
Use the multi-state lookup page and include every state where affected residents may live. The comparison table sorts selected states by the shortest stated deadline first.
Does this replace the FTC Safeguards Rule notice analysis?
No. State notice review is separate from the federal Safeguards Rule and 16 CFR 314.4(j) analysis. A serious incident file should preserve both review tracks.