White House task force urges temporary liability relief for cyber victims

A White House task force focused on artificial intelligence is urging federal regulators to consider limiting enforcement against organizations hit by cyberattacks that overwhelm their defenses. The group says existing standards for regulatory action may not reflect the changing threat environment as AI capabilities advance.

The recommendation followed the task force’s second meeting, held Thursday, Nov. 12, 2026, according to the White House. Its proposed flexibility is aimed at good-faith, voluntary reporting of cybersecurity vulnerabilities and incidents. The group said agencies should implement liability limits when lawful, practical and consistent with the interests of the American people, including public health and safety.

The task force proposed that the approach last at least 12 months, with the possibility of an extension after continued evaluation of the risk landscape. The statement presents this as a recommendation to federal agencies, not as a change to existing laws or regulations that has already taken effect.

Reporting incentives and regulatory overlap

The group said organizations that had reasonable protections in place until recently may now face greater exposure. It argued that regulatory standards for responding to cyber incidents may need to account for that change. The task force also said fear of enforcement could discourage incident reporting and information sharing, which it considers important to broader risk mitigation.

Companies have raised concerns about overlapping or contradictory cybersecurity requirements, arguing that compliance work can divert resources from incident response and defensive improvements. The administration has been exploring ways to reduce regulatory complexity. At the same time, the task force expressed support for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s forthcoming incident-reporting rule, while calling for clear, practical requirements that minimize duplication.

The task force’s proposal does not describe which agencies or reporting regimes would be covered, how eligibility for relief would be assessed, or what would qualify as a good-faith disclosure. Those details matter to organizations that must determine their reporting obligations during an incident. The statement frames any limits as subject to legal authority and public-interest considerations, rather than as a blanket exemption from cyber requirements.

AI incident sharing and government coordination

The meeting focused on the cybersecurity implications of advancing AI capabilities and efforts to improve the security and resilience of critical infrastructure. White House officials emphasized coordination among federal, state and local governments and private-sector organizations, whose responsibilities can overlap during response and recovery.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross described work to identify and mitigate risks from new AI models. The National Security Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology have been testing frontier models in partnership with major AI labs. Cairncross and Emil Michael, the Pentagon’s top research official, also discussed conversations with industry leaders about a process for companies to voluntarily report AI-related incidents.

Under the proposed approach, the government would analyze submitted incident information and share relevant findings with private-sector organizations to help them defend against similar threats. The task force also reiterated the administration’s support for a long-term reauthorization of the 2015 Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, which provides liability protections for companies sharing cyber threat data. The law is described as nearing expiration.

The task force said the government is working with frontier AI labs on tools intended to strengthen defenses, improve early detection and warning, and support faster remediation. It also pointed to a possible role for experts at U.S. national laboratories in incident response, but provided no operational details. The group said it would work with critical infrastructure operators to improve defenses against AI-fueled threats.

Critical infrastructure and federal networks

Cairncross and Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor said they were working to identify actionable measures to improve infrastructure security, with attention to small and medium-sized businesses. The task force is also developing initiatives to secure federal networks. Its meeting readout did not explain how those initiatives would work or provide a timeline.

The readout did not say whether CISA participated in the meeting or has been involved in the task force’s work. The group’s proposals therefore leave open practical questions for security and compliance leaders: how voluntary reporting would interact with mandatory deadlines, what information could be shared, and how organizations could demonstrate good-faith disclosure. Until agencies provide implementation details, organizations should treat the liability-relief proposal as a policy recommendation, not a substitute for current reporting and response obligations.