US Banks Must Now Report Hacks Within 36 Hours

Feb 15, 2022

Reading Time : 3 min

The rule is set to go into effect on April 1, 2022, with a compliance date of May 1, 2022.

Banking Organization Reporting Requirements

The new 36-hour deadline is triggered when a bank suffers a “computer security incident” that rises to the level of a “notification incident.” 1

While this includes more than just cyberattacks that expose personal information, not every computer security incident will trigger the reporting requirement. A “computer security incident” is defined as an incident that “results in actual harm to the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system or the information that the system processes, stores, or transmits.”2 A bank is only required to inform its regulator if it experiences a computer security incident that rises to the level of a “notification incident.” Notification incidents are those computer security incidents that disrupt or degrade, or are reasonably likely to disrupt or degrade, the bank’s:

  • Ability to carry out banking operations, activities or processes, or ability to deliver banking products and services to a material portion of its customer base, in the ordinary course of business.
  • Business line(s), including associated operations, services, functions and support, that upon failure would result in a material loss of revenue, profit or franchise value.3
  • Operations, including associated services, functions and support, as applicable, the failure or discontinuance of which would pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States.4

Once a banking organization determines that a notification incident has occurred, it has 36 hours to provide notice by email, phone or a similar method to its federal regulator. The final rule notes that the regulators realize that after a banking institution experiences a computer security incident, it may take time to determine if the incident rises to the level of a notification incident.5 The 36-hour countdown therefore only begins after such a determination has been made.

Bank Service Provider Reporting Requirements

Under the final rule, bank service providers include bank service companies or other persons that perform services covered by the Bank Service Company Act (BSCA), but not designated financial market utilities, which are separately regulated by the Federal Reserve. Financial technology companies could unwittingly fall under this provision since banks are not required to notify their vendors as to whether they are considered bank service providers. Financial technology companies should therefore inquire with their bank counterparties as to whether they have been identified as a bank service provider in any correspondence with a banking regulator and confirm whether they are subject to the BSCA and, accordingly, this new 36-hour notice requirement.

For bank service providers, the notification requirement is triggered once the service provider determines that they have experienced a computer security incident that “materially disrupted or degraded, or is reasonably likely to materially disrupt or degrade” covered services provided to a banking organization for four or more hours. This notification must be made “as soon as possible” by email or phone to at least one designated point of contact at each of its affected banking organization customers.6 This requirement is effective regardless of any differing notification requirements a bank service provider might have under contractual provision.

The final rule excludes scheduled testing, maintenance and soft updates the service providers have previously informed their customers about. However, if the scheduled maintenance, test or update goes beyond what was communicated to the banking organization customer and meets the notification standard, then this exception does not apply.

This final rule is a significant departure from the proposal opened for public comment at the beginning of this year, with the 36-hour timeline taking the place of “immediate” notification, along with a more tailored definition of “computer security incident” that gives rise to a “notification incident.” The April 1, 2022 effective date and May 1, 2022 compliance date reflect requests for more time to implement the rule.

Please contact a member of Akin Gump’s cybersecurity, privacy and data protection team if you have any questions about how this new rule will impact your company.


1 Dept. of the Treasury, Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Computer-Security Incident Notification Requirements for Banking Organizations and Their Bank Service Providers, Final Rule (November 18, 2021), available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/files/bcreg20211118a1.pdf.

2 Id. at 19.

3 The final rules state that banking organizations should evaluate this loss to determine if it is material to the organization as a whole. Id. at 51.

4 Id. at 58-59.

5 Id. at 32.

6 Id. at 70.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Data Dive

November 19, 2024

The European Union’s AI Office published the inaugural General-Purpose AI Code of Practice on November 14, 2024. The Code is intended to assist providers of AI models in their preparations for compliance with the forthcoming EU AI Act, to be enforced from August 2, 2025. The Code is designed to be both forward-thinking and globally applicable, addressing the areas of transparency, risk evaluation, technical safeguards and governance. While adherence to the Code is not mandatory, it is anticipated to serve as a means of demonstrating compliance with the obligations under the EU AI Act. Following a consultation period that garnered approximately 430 responses, the AI Office will be empowered to apply these rules, with penalties for nonconformity potentially reaching 3% of worldwide turnover or €15 million. Three additional iterations of the Code are anticipated to be produced within the coming five months.

...

Read More

Data Dive

November 15, 2024

On October 29, 2024, the DOJ issued a proposed rule prohibiting and restricting certain transactions that could allow persons from countries of concern, such as China, access to bulk sensitive personal data of U.S. citizens or to U.S. government-related data (regardless of volume).

...

Read More

Data Dive

October 17, 2024

During the course of any lending transaction, lenders will conduct a due diligence review of the borrower, including reviewing any relevant “know-your-customer” information.

...

Read More

Data Dive

September 17, 2024

Following the publication of the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act or Act) on 12 July 2024, there are now a series of steps that various EU bodies need to take towards implementation. One of the first key steps is in relation to the establishment of codes of practice to “contribute to the proper application” of the AI Act.

...

Read More

Data Dive

August 6, 2024

On July 30, 2024, the Senate passed the Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act (S. 2073) via an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 91-3 shortly before departing for the August recess.

...

Read More

Data Dive

July 18, 2024

On 12 July 2024, the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act or Act) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (EU), marking the final step in the AI Act’s legislative journey. Its publication triggers the timeline for the entry into force of the myriad obligations under the AI Act, along with the deadlines we set out below. The requirement to ensure a sufficient level of AI literacy of staff dealing with the operation and use of AI systems will, for example, apply to all providers and deployers on 2 February 2025.

...

Read More

Data Dive

July 18, 2024

On June 18, 2024, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced a settlement with R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company (RRD) for alleged internal control and disclosure failures following a ransomware attack in 2021. Without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings, the business communications and marketing services provider agreed to pay a civil penalty of over $2.1 million to settle charges alleging violations of Section 13(b)(2)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(a).1

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.