We review vendors based on rigorous testing and research but also take into account your feedback and our affiliate commission with providers. Some providers are owned by our parent company.
Learn more
vpnMentor was established in 2014 to review VPN services and cover privacy-related stories. Today, our team of hundreds of cybersecurity researchers, writers, and editors continues to help readers fight for their online freedom in partnership with Kape Technologies PLC, which also owns the following products: Holiday.com, ExpressVPN, CyberGhost, and Private Internet Access which may be ranked and reviewed on this website. The reviews published on vpnMentor are believed to be accurate as of the date of each article, and written according to our strict reviewing standards that prioritize professional and honest examination of the reviewer, taking into account the technical capabilities and qualities of the product together with its commercial value for users. The rankings and reviews we publish may also take into consideration the common ownership mentioned above, and affiliate commissions we earn for purchases through links on our website. We do not review all VPN providers and information is believed to be accurate as of the date of each article.
Advertising Disclosure

vpnMentor was established in 2014 to review VPN services and cover privacy-related stories. Today, our team of hundreds of cybersecurity researchers, writers, and editors continues to help readers fight for their online freedom in partnership with Kape Technologies PLC, which also owns the following products: Holiday.com, ExpressVPN, CyberGhost, and Private Internet Access which may be ranked and reviewed on this website. The reviews published on vpnMentor are believed to be accurate as of the date of each article, and written according to our strict reviewing standards that prioritize professional and honest examination of the reviewer, taking into account the technical capabilities and qualities of the product together with its commercial value for users. The rankings and reviews we publish may also take into consideration the common ownership mentioned above, and affiliate commissions we earn for purchases through links on our website. We do not review all VPN providers and information is believed to be accurate as of the date of each article.

Healthline and California AG Agree $1.55M Privacy Settlement

Healthline and California AG Agree $1.55M Privacy Settlement
Hendrik Human Published on July 05, 2025 Cybersecurity Researcher

The office of California Attorney General Bob Fonta announced that it had secured the largest consumer privacy settlement in the state’s history against Healthline. While still pending court approval, Healthline Media LLC (Healthline) agreed to the $1.55 million settlement to resolve allegations of improper use of online tracking technology on the Healthline.com website.

The Attorney General’s Office made the announcement on Tuesday, the 1st of July. It comes after a California Department of Justice (DoJ) investigation concluded that Healthline “failed to allow customers to opt out of targeted advertising and shared data with third parties without CCPA-mandated privacy protections.”

On top of the record-breaking payment, the AG also secured strong injunctive terms. For example, Healthline is accused of having violated the “Purpose Limitation Principle” by sending users articles that claim that they may have already been diagnosed with a medical condition. If approved by the court, Healthline will be prohibited from continuing with these types of communications.

Healthline’s other alleged violations include failing to ensure that “advertising contracts contain privacy protections for readers’ data required by the CCPA” as well as using a non-functional “consent banner” that is supposed to allow users to disable cookies. The latter is considered a violation of the Unfair Competition Law.

An added condition of the settlement is that Healthline must address all of these other violations as well as maintain a CCPA-compliance program.

According to the statement, this is Bonta’s fourth enforcement action under the California Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) — a sign that the office is ramping up its role as a privacy watchdog. While still paling in comparison to similar cases in other jurisdictions — Meta was fined $1.3 billion by the EU while TikTok faced a $379 million fine from Irish regulators — it’s a warning shot regarding the use of California’s digital information.

About the Author

Hendrik is a writer at vpnMentor, specializing in VPN comparisons and user guides. With 5+ years of experience as a tech and cybersecurity writer, plus a background in corporate IT, he brings a variety of perspectives to test VPN services and analyze how they address the needs of different users.

Please, comment on how to improve this article. Your feedback matters!

Leave a comment

This field must contain more than 50 characters

The field content should not exceed 1000 letters

Sorry, links are not allowed in this field!

Name should contain at least 3 letters

The field content should not exceed 80 letters

Sorry, links are not allowed in this field!

Please enter a valid email address