Department of General Services: drone cybersecurity.
The impact of AB 740 is significant as it applies to all levels of government, including cities and counties, thus establishing a comprehensive state-mandated local program. By requiring compliance with the upcoming regulations, the bill seeks to protect sensitive information transmitted or stored by drones. Furthermore, local governmental entities are expected to discontinue the use of noncompliant units by January 1, 2026, which indicates a transition period aimed at bolstering cybersecurity protocols across all governmental operations utilizing drone technology.
Assembly Bill 740, introduced by Assembly Members Gabriel and Petrie-Norris, addresses cybersecurity measures related to unmanned aircraft systems used by government entities in California. The bill mandates the Department of General Services, in consultation with the Chief of the Office of Information Security, to develop rules and regulations by January 1, 2025, ensuring that all unmanned aircraft systems meet specified safeguards for data confidentiality, integrity, and availability. This legislative action is a response to the increasingly vital role of drone technology in government operations and the need to manage risks associated with data collection and transmission.
General sentiment regarding AB 740 tends to be supportive among those advocating for enhanced cybersecurity and responsible technological practices. Supporters argue that establishing stringent standards for drone use is essential for safeguarding data against vulnerabilities. However, there are likely concerns regarding the financial and operational implications for local agencies tasked with meeting these new regulations, particularly regarding funding and compliance costs.
One point of contention involves the funding and resource allocation necessary for local agencies to implement the required changes. The bill specifies mechanisms for reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates determines state-mandated costs are imposed on local agencies, which has sparked debate over the adequacy of state support for local compliance efforts. Additionally, the absolute nature of compliance requirements could be viewed as burdensome by some local government entities, raising questions about balance between security and operational flexibility.