Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

SEC Cybersecurity Disclosure Trends: 2025 Update on Corporate Reporting Practices

By Jena M. Valdetero & Wouter van Wengen on February 7, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Security Exchange Committee SEC. Independent agency of the United States federal government-shutterstock_1427858837 (1)

Six months after the SEC’s Cybersecurity Incident Disclosure Rule (SEC Rule) came into force, an April 2024 GT Alert summarized disclosure trends. The GT Alert identified that the companies who filed a mandatory form 8-K disclosing a cybersecurity incident had erred on the side of caution, hedged on whether the materiality threshold had been met or outright stated that it had not, reported an incident early, and provided only high-level information about the incident.

The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (Corp Fin) issued clarifying guidance on May 21, 2024, noting that companies were filing materiality disclosures under new Item 1.05 for incidents that did not rise to the level of a material adverse event. In other words, companies possibly afraid of being second-guessed were opting to report under Item 1.05 even when they determined that the cybersecurity incident did not have a material adverse event. The SEC’s guidance clarified that new Item 1.05 was only appropriate for cybersecurity incidents that had a material effect on the company and suggested companies could avail themselves of voluntary disclosure under Item 8.01 instead.

As a potential result of the May guidance, companies are increasingly filing non-material cyber incident disclosures under Item 8.01 of Form 8-K, while material incidents continue to be reported under Item 1.05. Since April 2024, 41 companies have filed a form 8-K to disclose a new cybersecurity incident, but 26 did so under 8.01 and 15 did so under 1.05.1 Additionally, companies are providing more detailed disclosures about affected systems and data, but amended filings often lack clarity on when additional information was discovered and primarily confirm the resumption of operations with no material impact.

Continue reading the full GT Alert.

Photo of Jena M. Valdetero Jena M. Valdetero

Jena M. Valdetero serves as Co-Chair of the firm’s U.S. Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice where she advises clients on complex data privacy and security issues. She has led more than 1,000 data breach investigations. A litigator by background, Jena defends companies against…

Jena M. Valdetero serves as Co-Chair of the firm’s U.S. Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice where she advises clients on complex data privacy and security issues. She has led more than 1,000 data breach investigations. A litigator by background, Jena defends companies against privacy and data breach litigation, with an emphasis on class action lawsuits. She has designed and conducted dozens of data breach tabletop exercises to empower clients to respond effectively to a data security incident. She also counsels companies on data privacy and security compliance programs and advises on privacy and cyber risks associated with mergers and acquisitions, venture capital, and securities. Jena also advises a diverse array of clients on compliance with existing and emerging privacy laws, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the Gramm Leach Bliley Act (GLBA), and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). She is a certified privacy professional through the International Association of Privacy Professionals (CIPP/US), for which she is a former KnowledgeNet Co-Chair.

Read more about Jena M. ValdeteroEmailJena's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Wouter van Wengen Wouter van Wengen

Wouter van Wengen is a member of the corporate practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Amsterdam office. He focuses his practice on intellectual property law, IT contracts and data protection law. He represents national and international clients in the creative sector, the technology industry…

Wouter van Wengen is a member of the corporate practice in Greenberg Traurig’s Amsterdam office. He focuses his practice on intellectual property law, IT contracts and data protection law. He represents national and international clients in the creative sector, the technology industry, and a variety of other companies.

Wouter holds an LL.M. degree in information law at the University of Amsterdam, and an LL.M. degree in Intellectual Property Law at Indiana University Maurer School of Law and is a member of the Dutch Bar Association.

Read more about Wouter van WengenEmailWouter's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog:
    Data Privacy Dish
  • Organization:
    Greenberg Traurig, LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo