Kentucky · verified through August 25, 2026

Kentucky: law status and evidence context.

Law status, direct attached-library attribution, and public enforcement context are shown separately. A zero direct total does not mean no enforcement exists.

KY · 6 requirements mapped / control outcomes supported

Law status

Verified comprehensive law

Yes - Kentucky Consumer Data Protection Act

Official name / citation
2024 Ky. Acts ch. 72 (HB 15), new sections of KRS ch. 367
Status / effective date
Enacted; effective January 1, 2026 per the official bill record
Principal enforcer
Kentucky Attorney General

Direct attached-library attribution

0 cases · $0

These totals are assigned solely by the attachment’s state heading. Shared multistate totals are not allocated in full to every state.

The attached library does not enumerate participant-level allocations for every multistate matter; shared settlement totals are presented once at the national level and are not duplicated into state totals.

Official law sources

Other generally applicable PII law

Also: KRS 365.732 (computer security breach notification, effective July 15, 2014) - https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=43326

Public enforcement context

Tier 1

23andMe (bankruptcy claims)

$150 million in approved claims; $18 million immediate payment; Kentucky share stated as $259,375 · July 20, 2026

Kentucky joined the 42-AG 23andMe settlement over the 2023 genetic-data breach.

Legal basis: State privacy/consumer-protection claims in bankruptcy

Official case source (opens in a new tab)

Mapped control outcomes

1 personal data inventory/data map; 2 sensitive-data discovery; 3 downstream copy tracking; 8 breach blast-radius analysis; 9 retention/minimization; 10 regulator audit evidence

Kestryl can evidence where regulated personal data actually resides across structured stores and unstructured attachments/images, produce audit rows and evidence packs showing when each location was discovered and reviewed, and apply structured-data remediation modes (mask, vault, strip) to reduce exposure. It does not alter source attachments or documents, and its output is technical evidence supporting controls, not proof of legal compliance.