Law / United States / New Mexico

Data Breach Notification Act, security and disposal duties

Laws 2017, ch. 36, House Bill 15, Sections 3 to 5 (NMSA 1978, Secs. 57-12C-3 to 57-12C-5)

In force since .

A security baseline statutes rule binding private bodies.

Obligation class
Security

What it requires

  • This binds any person that owns or licenses records containing the personal identifying information of a New Mexico resident, or that discloses that information to a service provider under contract; it does not bind the State of New Mexico or any of its political subdivisions.
  • Implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices, appropriate to the nature of the personal identifying information held, to protect it from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure.NIST CSF 2.0PR.DS-01
  • Arrange for proper disposal, shredding, erasing, or otherwise rendering the information unreadable or undecipherable, of records containing personal identifying information once they are no longer reasonably needed for business purposes.NIST CSF 2.0ID.AM-08
  • Where personal identifying information is disclosed to a service provider under a contract, require by that contract that the service provider also implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the information.NIST CSF 2.0GV.SC-05
  • There is no private right of action; only the Attorney General may enforce this duty, seeking an injunction, damages for actual costs or losses, and, where the violation was knowing or reckless, a civil penalty of $25,000. A separate, higher penalty schedule tied to a count of failed notifications governs this Act's notification duty alone, this jurisdiction's privacy row, and does not apply to a violation of the security or disposal duty described here.

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.

In the frameworks

NIST Privacy Framework
  • ID.DE-P3Contracts with data processing ecosystem parties are used to implement appropriate measures designed to meet the objectives of an organization’s privacy program.
  • CT.DM-P5Data are destroyed according to policy.
  • PR.DS-P5Protections against data leaks are implemented.
NIST CSF 2.0
  • GV.SC-05Requirements to address cybersecurity risks in supply chains are established, prioritized, and integrated into contracts and other types of agreements with suppliers and other relevant third parties
  • ID.AM-08Systems, hardware, software, services, and data are managed throughout their life cycles
  • PR.DS-01The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-at-rest are protected
CIS Controls
  • 3.10Encryption of sensitive data as it crosses networks.
  • 3.11Encryption of sensitive data where it is stored on servers and applications.
  • 6.8Access rights defined by job role, and kept up to date.
  • 7.1A documented, reviewed approach to finding and handling weaknesses.
FINOS AIGF
1 more
ENISA NIS2 guidance
  • 2.1Risk management framework
  • 3.1Incident handling policy
  • 4.1Business continuity and disaster recovery plan
  • 6.2Secure development life cycle
  • 6.5Security testing
  • 6.10Vulnerability handling and disclosure
2 more
  • 9.1Cryptography
  • 11.2Management of access rights

Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST CSF 2.0, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law

CIS Critical Security Controls® (CIS Controls®) v8.1 © Center for Internet Security, Inc. Safeguard numbers are used under a CIS Controls Supporter License; the one-line descriptions beside them are our own, not CIS text.

If you get it wrong

Criminal exposureNo

Private right of actionNo

Penalty structure

NMSA 1978 Sec. 57-12C-11(C) makes this $25,000 civil penalty available only where the court finds the violation knowing or reckless; an ordinary violation draws only the injunction and actual-costs-or-losses damages available under Sec. 57-12C-11(B). The same subsection also lets the court impose, in the case of failed notification, $10 per instance up to $150,000 in place of the flat $25,000 if that figure is greater; that per-instance alternative has no application to a violation of the security-procedures or disposal duty described here, which involves no notification to count, and it governs this Act's own notification duty, this jurisdiction's privacy row, instead.

Rule
Fixed only
As of
Currency
USD
Fixed cap
25,000

Who enforces it

Enforcement body

New Mexico Attorney General; NMSA 1978 Sec. 57-12C-11(A) confines standing to the Attorney General, acting on behalf of individuals and in the name of the state, with no dedicated regulator distinct from that authority and no published enforcement record located for this duty specifically.

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

A person that owns or licenses personal identifying information of a New Mexico resident must implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the information to protect it from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure.

The same person must arrange for proper disposal, meaning shredding, erasing, or otherwise modifying the information to make it unreadable or undecipherable, of records containing personal identifying information once they are no longer reasonably needed for business purposes.

Where a person discloses personal identifying information to a service provider under contract, that contract must require the service provider to implement and maintain the same reasonable security procedures and practices.

The Act exempts the State of New Mexico and its political subdivisions entirely, and enforcement is confined to the Attorney General, who may obtain an injunction, damages for actual costs or losses, and, for a knowing or reckless violation, a civil penalty of $25,000; the Act creates no private right of action. Enacted by Laws 2017, chapter 36 (House Bill 15); the Act took effect on .

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app crawls the web, trains models, deploys a chatbot, sends automated outreach, makes high-risk automated decisions, processes voice recordings, processes biometric data, processes personal data, serves under-18s, operates a social platform, ships a mobile app, distributes a software product, generates content with AI, publishes adult content, operates an app store, reuses other publishers' content, records calls, records text chat or tracks devices.

Back to the example  ·  Lint your app

Page updated .