Cybersecurity Risks from Unmanned Aircraft Systems:
HB 1379 would amend Florida law governing the Florida Cybersecurity Advisory Council to require the council to meet at least quarterly and specifically assess cybersecurity risks associated with unmanned aircraft systems used by state agencies. The council would also be directed to provide recommendations for mitigating those threats. The bill is narrowly focused on state-government use of drones and the cybersecurity concerns that may arise from their operation, communication systems, or data handling.
The bill does not create a new regulatory program for private drone users or change general aviation law. Instead, it adds a recurring advisory duty to an existing council in section 282.319, Florida Statutes, and sets an effective date of July 1, 2025. Its practical effect would be to formalize ongoing review of drone-related cybersecurity risks within state government and to encourage policy recommendations for agencies using unmanned aircraft systems.
HB 1379 would amend section 282.319, Florida Statutes, by adding a new duty for the Florida Cybersecurity Advisory Council to meet quarterly and evaluate cybersecurity risks tied to unmanned aircraft systems used by state agencies. The bill would affect the council’s responsibilities and, indirectly, state agencies that deploy drones, but it would not impose direct operational requirements or penalties on private parties. It would take effect July 1, 2025, if enacted.
The available legislative record suggests limited public controversy and a generally technical, policy-oriented purpose. There are no recorded votes or committee transcript excerpts indicating strong opposition or support, but the bill ultimately died in the Information Technology Budget & Policy Subcommittee. That outcome suggests the measure did not advance, though the text itself reflects a straightforward cybersecurity oversight approach rather than a partisan or highly contentious proposal.
The main point of potential contention is the scope and necessity of adding a recurring quarterly review requirement for an existing advisory council, particularly whether this creates meaningful security benefits or simply adds another reporting obligation. Any concerns would likely center on administrative burden, duplication of existing cybersecurity oversight, and whether state agencies already have sufficient authority to address drone-related risks. Because there are no transcripts or votes provided, no specific member or stakeholder objections are documented in the record supplied.