Honestly, the vibe at the SEC has shifted. If you were following the headlines a year ago, it felt like every CISO in America was one bad day away from a lawsuit.
But look at the SEC cybersecurity disclosure enforcement news today, and you’ll see a much different picture. The agency just dropped its massive, long-running case against SolarWinds and its CISO, Timothy Brown. It’s over. Done. With prejudice.
This wasn't a small deal. The SEC had been trying to pin internal accounting control failures on a cyberattack that happened back in 2020. They were basically saying that if your digital "locks" aren't good enough, your "books and records" are broken.
A judge didn’t buy it. And now, in January 2026, the SEC has officially walked away.
The End of the SolarWinds Era
The voluntary dismissal of the SolarWinds case is the biggest signal yet that the aggressive "experiment" in cyber enforcement is cooling off. Paul Atkins, the new SEC Chair, has been pretty vocal about streamlining things. He’s not a fan of what people call "regulation by enforcement."
Basically, the SEC is moving back to a "principles-based" approach. They want you to tell the truth, but they aren't going to sue you for every line of code that gets bypassed by a hacker.
✨ Don't miss: The Lawrence Mancuso Brighton NY Tragedy: What Really Happened
That doesn't mean you can just ignore the rules, though. Not even close.
What’s Actually Happening with Item 1.05
There is still a four-day clock. You’ve probably heard of Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. It’s the rule that says if you have a "material" hack, you have four business days to tell the world.
Here is where companies were getting tripped up: they were over-disclosing. Out of pure fear, companies were filing Item 1.05 forms for tiny incidents—stuff like a single employee getting phished.
The SEC finally stepped in and said, "Stop it."
Now, the guidance is clear. If it’s not material, don’t use Item 1.05. Use Item 8.01 instead. It’s like a "FYI" box rather than a "RED ALERT" box. This keeps investors from panicking every time a server blips.
🔗 Read more: The Fatal Accident on I-90 Yesterday: What We Know and Why This Stretch Stays Dangerous
The "AI-Washing" Trap
While cyber-incident enforcement is softening, AI-washing is the new target. The SEC and the DOJ are currently teaming up to hammer companies that lie about their tech.
Take the case against Nate, Inc. and its former CEO, Albert Saniger. They claimed their shopping app used sophisticated AI. In reality? It was mostly humans manually entering data. The SEC isn't just looking at public companies here; they're going after private startups too if they use fake AI claims to raise venture capital.
If you say you have an "AI-driven cybersecurity mesh," you better actually have one. If it’s just a guy in a basement with an Excel sheet, you’re going to have a bad time.
Reporting for 2026: The "Housekeeping" Year
We are officially in the 2026 reporting season. For the first time in years, there are no new major disclosure requirements.
It’s a breather.
💡 You might also like: The Ethical Maze of Airplane Crash Victim Photos: Why We Look and What it Costs
Most companies are using this time to clean up their S-K Item 106 disclosures. This is the part of the annual report where you describe who is actually in charge of your security. The SEC has been sending out "comment letters" (which is basically a polite way of saying "try again") to companies that are being too vague.
Specifically, they want to know:
- Who is the person in the room when a hack happens?
- Does your Board of Directors actually understand the risk, or are they just nodding along?
- How do you find "material" risks before they become "material" disasters?
Why Materiality is Still a Mess
"Materiality" is a fancy word for "important enough for a shareholder to care." The problem? There is no magic number. A $10 million loss might be material for a small tech firm but a rounding error for Apple.
The SEC expects you to look at qualitative factors now.
- Did you lose customer trust?
- Did your competitor get your trade secrets?
- Is your brand name now synonymous with "identity theft"?
If the answer is yes, you have to file that 8-K. Even if it didn't cost you a penny in actual cash today, the "long-term operations" impact makes it material.
Actionable Steps for the 2026 Season
You shouldn't wait for an enforcement officer to knock on your door to get this right. The landscape is calmer, but the rules are firmer.
- Audit your AI claims. Sit down with your engineering team. Ask them: "If the SEC asked for proof that this feature is AI, what would we show them?" If the answer is "marketing magic," change the website today.
- Refresh the 8-K playbook. Ensure your legal team knows the difference between Item 1.05 and Item 8.01. Do not file a "Material Incident" report unless you are 100% sure it’s material.
- Verify the Board’s "Cyber Literacy." The SEC is looking at the expertise of the people overseeing the CISO. If your board doesn't have a single person who knows what a SQL injection is, you might want to consider some training or a new committee member.
- Clean up the 10-K language. Move away from "boilerplate" risk factors. If you say "we might get hacked," the SEC will ignore it. If you say "we face specific risks from our third-party cloud provider in Eastern Europe," you’re doing it right.
The SEC cybersecurity disclosure enforcement news today shows that the "wild west" of the last two years is ending. We’re moving into a phase of mature, measured oversight. Don't let the lack of "new" rules fool you into getting lazy. Accuracy is the only thing that will keep the regulators away.