Massachusetts breach notification lookup
Use this Massachusetts breach notification lookup as an incident-triage clock, not as legal advice. It shows the fields Policywright has verified for Massachusetts: 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 2026-08-13. Not legal advice.
| Field | Verified value | Use in the incident file |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93H, §§ 3-4 | Link the decision record to the official citation |
| Deadline | Notice to affected residents, the Attorney General, and OCABR as soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay; notice may be delayed only if law enforcement determines that notice would impede a criminal investigation. | Sort multi-state response work by the shortest stated clock |
| Residents | Massachusetts residents whose personal information was acquired or used by an unauthorized person, or used for an unauthorized purpose, after a known security breach or unauthorized use. | Identify whether affected residents receive notice |
| Regulator | Notify the Massachusetts Attorney General and the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation, including the nature of the breach or unauthorized use, resident count, steps taken or planned, and whether the organization maintains a written information security program. | Record AG or regulator portal review |
| Consumer-reporting agencies | After OCABR receives the breach notice, it identifies relevant consumer reporting agencies or state agencies and forwards those names to the notifying person or agency; the notifying person or agency must then notify the identified agencies as soon as practicable and without unreasonable delay. | Check whether the affected count crosses a CRA threshold |
| Consumer trigger | Massachusetts requires notice to the Attorney General, the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation, and affected residents; OCABR guidance also asks organizations that experience a breach to report whether they have a written information security program. | Tie notice analysis to the statutory trigger, not an unsupported assumption |
What this state lookup shows
Massachusetts fields are rendered from the verified state dataset only when the field exists. No deadline is inferred when the data does not state one.
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93H, §§ 3-4 is the statute citation retained for this lookup, and the state page links to the official statute source when available.
Massachusetts requires notice to the Attorney General, the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation, and affected residents; OCABR guidance also asks organizations that experience a breach to report whether they have a written information security program. 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 Massachusetts lookup is 2026-08-13. 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 Massachusetts, 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 Massachusetts 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 Massachusetts 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 Massachusetts?
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.