+BDSG § 28 Datenverarbeitung zu im öffentlichen Interesse liegenden Archivzwecken
|
BDSG § 28 Datenverarbeitung zu im öffentlichen Interesse liegenden Archivzwecken
(1) Abweichend von Artikel 9 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 ist die Verarbeitung besonderer Kategorien personenbezogener Daten im Sinne des Artikels 9 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 zulässig, wenn sie für im öffentlichen Interesse liegende Archivzwecke erforderlich ist. Der Verantwortliche sieht angemessene und spezifische Maßnahmen zur Wahrung der Interessen der betroffenen Person gemäß § 22 Absatz 2 Satz 2 vor. (2) Das Recht auf Auskunft der betroffenen Person gemäß Artikel 15 der Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 besteht nicht, wenn das Archivgut nicht durch den Namen der Person erschlossen ist oder keine Angaben gemacht werden, die das Auffinden des betreffenden Archivguts mit vertretbarem Verwaltungsaufwand ermöglichen. (3) Das Recht auf Berichtigung der betroffenen Person gemäß Artikel 16 der Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 besteht nicht, wenn die personenbezogenen Daten zu Archivzwecken im öffentlichen Interesse verarbeitet werden. Bestreitet die betroffene Person die Richtigkeit der personenbezogenen Daten, ist ihr die Möglichkeit einer Gegendarstellung einzuräumen. Das zuständige Archiv ist verpflichtet, die Gegendarstellung den Unterlagen hinzuzufügen. (4) Die in Artikel 18 Absatz 1 Buchstabe a, b und d, den Artikeln 20 und 21 der Verordnung (EU) 2016/679 vorgesehenen Rechte bestehen nicht, soweit diese Rechte voraussichtlich die Verwirklichung der im öffentlichen Interesse liegenden Archivzwecke unmöglich machen oder ernsthaft beeinträchtigen und die Ausnahmen für die Erfüllung dieser Zwecke erforderlich sind.
1. Přehled
1.1 Odkazy
1.2 Identifikované požadavky
1.3 Související standardy
2. Identifikované požadavky
Požadavky
| Zdroj |
Požadavek |
3. Související standardy
Standardy
| Zdroj |
Požadavek |
|
SCF
|
Security of Personal Data (PD)
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure Personal Data (PD) is protected by logical and physical security safeguards that are sufficient and appropriately scoped to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the PD.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Data classification program
∙ Data privacy program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Product / project management
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Data classification program
∙ Data privacy program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Product / project management
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Data classification program
∙ Data privacy program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Product / project management
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Data classification program
∙ Data privacy program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Product / project management
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Data classification program
∙ Data privacy program
∙ Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
∙ Product / project management
SCR-CMM
Level 0 Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process.
▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control:
▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required.
▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization.
▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).
Level 3 Well Defined
Privacy (PRI) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Policies and standards associated with PRI domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRI domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners.
▪ A data privacy team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain PRI domain capabilities.
▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data privacy operations (e.g., privacy notice management software and customer management solution).
▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRI domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls).
▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to ensure Personal Data (PD) is protected by logical and physical security safeguards that are sufficient and appropriately scoped to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the PD.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions:
▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control.
▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
|
|