+Άρθρο 15 Δικαίωμα πρόσβασης του υποκειμένου των δεδομένων
---+Άρθρο 15 1.
---+Άρθρο 15 2.
---+Άρθρο 15 3.
---+Άρθρο 15 4.

Άρθρο 15 Δικαίωμα πρόσβασης του υποκειμένου των δεδομένων

1. Επισκόπηση

,
Άρθρο 15 1.

Το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων έχει το δικαίωμα να λαμβάνει από τον υπεύθυνο επεξεργασίας επιβεβαίωση για το κατά πόσον ή όχι τα δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα που το αφορούν υφίστανται επεξεργασία και, εάν συμβαίνει τούτο, το δικαίωμα πρόσβασης στα δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα και στις ακόλουθες πληροφορίες:

α) 

τους σκοπούς της επεξεργασίας,

β) 

τις σχετικές κατηγορίες δεδομένων προσωπικού χαρακτήρα,

γ) 

τους αποδέκτες ή τις κατηγορίες αποδεκτών στους οποίους κοινολογήθηκαν ή πρόκειται να κοινολογηθούν τα δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα, ιδίως τους αποδέκτες σε τρίτες χώρες ή διεθνείς οργανισμούς,

δ) 

εάν είναι δυνατόν, το χρονικό διάστημα για το οποίο θα αποθηκευτούν τα δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα ή, όταν αυτό είναι αδύνατο, τα κριτήρια που καθορίζουν το εν λόγω διάστημα,

ε) 

την ύπαρξη δικαιώματος υποβολής αιτήματος στον υπεύθυνο επεξεργασίας για διόρθωση ή διαγραφή δεδομένων προσωπικού χαρακτήρα ή περιορισμό της επεξεργασίας των δεδομένων προσωπικού χαρακτήρα που αφορά το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων ή δικαιώματος αντίταξης στην εν λόγω επεξεργασία,

στ) 

το δικαίωμα υποβολής καταγγελίας σε εποπτική αρχή,

ζ) 

όταν τα δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα δεν συλλέγονται από το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων, κάθε διαθέσιμη πληροφορία σχετικά με την προέλευσή τους,

η) 

την ύπαρξη αυτοματοποιημένης λήψης αποφάσεων, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της κατάρτισης προφίλ, που προβλέπεται στο άρθρο 22 παράγραφοι 1 και 4 και, τουλάχιστον στις περιπτώσεις αυτές, σημαντικές πληροφορίες σχετικά με τη λογική που ακολουθείται, καθώς και τη σημασία και τις προβλεπόμενες συνέπειες της εν λόγω επεξεργασίας για το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων.
Άρθρο 15 2.
Όταν δεδομένα προσωπικού χαρακτήρα διαβιβάζονται σε τρίτη χώρα ή σε διεθνή οργανισμό, το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων έχει το δικαίωμα να ενημερώνεται για τις κατάλληλες εγγυήσεις σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 46 σχετικά με τη διαβίβαση.
Άρθρο 15 3.
Ο υπεύθυνος επεξεργασίας παρέχει αντίγραφο των δεδομένων προσωπικού χαρακτήρα που υποβάλλονται σε επεξεργασία. Για επιπλέον αντίγραφα που ενδέχεται να ζητηθούν από το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων, ο υπεύθυνος επεξεργασίας μπορεί να επιβάλει την καταβολή εύλογου τέλους για διοικητικά έξοδα. Εάν το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων υποβάλλει το αίτημα με ηλεκτρονικά μέσα και εκτός εάν το υποκείμενο των δεδομένων ζητήσει κάτι διαφορετικό, η ενημέρωση παρέχεται σε ηλεκτρονική μορφή που χρησιμοποιείται συνήθως.
Άρθρο 15 4.
Το δικαίωμα να λαμβάνεται αντίγραφο που αναφέρεται στην παράγραφο 3 δεν επηρεάζει δυσμενώς τα δικαιώματα και τις ελευθερίες άλλων.

1.1 Παραπομπές

1.2 Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

1.3 Σχετικά πρότυπα

2. Εντοπισμένες απαιτήσεις

Απαιτήσεις

3. Σχετικά πρότυπα

Πρότυπα
SCF Personal Data (PD) Categories

Description

Mechanisms exist to define and implement data handling and protection requirements for specific categories of sensitive Personal Data (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

Privacy (PRI) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). 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.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRI domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRI domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Data privacy management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Data privacy management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ The data privacy program is developed to work with IT and cybersecurity staff to ensure that applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual data privacy obligations for Personal Data (PD) are properly identified and implemented.

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 define and implement data handling and protection requirements for specific categories of sensitive Personal Data (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.
SCF Data Subject Empowerment

Description

Mechanisms exist to provide authenticated data subjects the ability to:
(1) Access their Personal Data (PD) that is being processed, stored and shared, except where the burden, risk or expense of providing access would be disproportionate to the benefit offered to the data subject through granting access;
(2) Obtain answers on the specifics of how their PD is collected, received, processed, stored, transmitted, shared, updated and/or disposed;
(3) Obtain the source(s) of their PD;
(4) Obtain the categories of their PD being collected, received, processed, stored and shared;
(5) Request correction to their PD due to inaccuracies;
(6) Request erasure of their PD; and
(7) Restrict the further collecting, receiving, processing, storing, transmitting, updated and/or sharing of their 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

Privacy (PRI) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). 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.
▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRI domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners.
▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRI domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD).
▪ Data privacy management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines).
▪ Data privacy management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel.
▪ The data privacy program is developed to work with IT and cybersecurity staff to ensure that applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual data privacy obligations for Personal Data (PD) are properly identified and implemented.

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 provide authenticated data subjects the ability to:
(1) Access their Personal Data (PD) that is being processed, stored and shared, except where the burden, risk or expense of providing access would be disproportionate to the benefit offered to the data subject through granting access;
(2) Obtain answers on the specifics of how their PD is collected, received, processed, stored, transmitted, shared, updated and/or disposed;
(3) Obtain the source(s) of their PD;
(4) Obtain the categories of their PD being collected, received, processed, stored and shared;
(5) Request correction to their PD due to inaccuracies;
(6) Request erasure of their PD; and
(7) Restrict the further collecting, receiving, processing, storing, transmitting, updated and/or sharing of their PD.

Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled

Privacy (PRI) capabilities, in addition to being standardized across the entity and centrally managed to ensure consistency across Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD), efforts are metrics driven to provide sufficient insight for decision makers to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and/or identify areas for improvement. Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist:
▪ Applicable SCR-CMM Level 3 (Well Defined) capabilities are implemented and operational.
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
▪ Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
▪ Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
▪ Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
▪ Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
▪ Business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes to evolve capabilities.

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.