+Artículo 28 Encargado del tratamiento
---+Artículo 28 1.
---+Artículo 28 2.
---+Artículo 28 3.
---+Artículo 28 4.
---+Artículo 28 5.
---+Artículo 28 6.
---+Artículo 28 7.
---+Artículo 28 8.
---+Artículo 28 9.
---+Artículo 28 10.
|
Artículo 28 Encargado del tratamiento
-
1. Resumen
| Título |
Regulación |
|
Artículo 28 1.
|
Cuando se vaya a realizar un tratamiento por cuenta de un responsable del tratamiento, este elegirá únicamente un encargado que ofrezca garantías suficientes para aplicar medidas técnicas y organizativas apropiadas, de manera que el tratamiento sea conforme con los requisitos del presente Reglamento y garantice la protección de los derechos del interesado.
|
|
Artículo 28 2.
|
El encargado del tratamiento no recurrirá a otro encargado sin la autorización previa por escrito, específica o general, del responsable. En este último caso, el encargado informará al responsable de cualquier cambio previsto en la incorporación o sustitución de otros encargados, dando así al responsable la oportunidad de oponerse a dichos cambios.
|
|
Artículo 28 3.
|
El tratamiento por el encargado se regirá por un contrato u otro acto jurídico con arreglo al Derecho de la Unión o de los Estados miembros, que vincule al encargado respecto del responsable y establezca el objeto, la duración, la naturaleza y la finalidad del tratamiento, el tipo de datos personales y categorías de interesados, y las obligaciones y derechos del responsable. Dicho contrato o acto jurídico estipulará, en particular, que el encargado:
a)
tratará los datos personales únicamente siguiendo instrucciones documentadas del responsable, inclusive con respecto a las transferencias de datos personales a un tercer país o una organización internacional, salvo que esté obligado a ello en virtud del Derecho de la Unión o de los Estados miembros que se aplique al encargado; en tal caso, el encargado informará al responsable de esa exigencia legal previa al tratamiento, salvo que tal Derecho lo prohíba por razones importantes de interés público;
▼C2
b)
garantizará que las personas autorizadas para tratar datos personales se hayan comprometido a respetar la confidencialidad o estén sujetas a una obligación de confidencialidad de naturaleza legal;
▼B
c)
tomará todas las medidas necesarias de conformidad con el artículo 32;
d)
respetará las condiciones indicadas en los apartados 2 y 4 para recurrir a otro encargado del tratamiento;
▼C2
e)
asistirá al responsable, teniendo en cuenta la naturaleza del tratamiento, a través de medidas técnicas y organizativas apropiadas, siempre que sea posible, para que este pueda cumplir con su obligación de responder a las solicitudes que tengan por objeto el ejercicio de los derechos de los interesados establecidos en el capítulo III;
▼B
f)
ayudará al responsable a garantizar el cumplimiento de las obligaciones establecidas en los artículos 32 a 36, teniendo en cuenta la naturaleza del tratamiento y la información a disposición del encargado;
g)
a elección del responsable, suprimirá o devolverá todos los datos personales una vez finalice la prestación de los servicios de tratamiento, y suprimirá las copias existentes a menos que se requiera la conservación de los datos personales en virtud del Derecho de la Unión o de los Estados miembros;
h)
pondrá a disposición del responsable toda la información necesaria para demostrar el cumplimiento de las obligaciones establecidas en el presente artículo, así como para permitir y contribuir a la realización de auditorías, incluidas inspecciones, por parte del responsable o de otro auditor autorizado por dicho responsable.
En relación con lo dispuesto en la letra h) del párrafo primero, el encargado informará inmediatamente al responsable si, en su opinión, una instrucción infringe el presente Reglamento u otras disposiciones en materia de protección de datos de la Unión o de los Estados miembros.
|
|
Artículo 28 4.
|
Cuando un encargado del tratamiento recurra a otro encargado para llevar a cabo determinadas actividades de tratamiento por cuenta del responsable, se impondrán a este otro encargado, mediante contrato u otro acto jurídico establecido con arreglo al Derecho de la Unión o de los Estados miembros, las mismas obligaciones de protección de datos que las estipuladas en el contrato u otro acto jurídico entre el responsable y el encargado a que se refiere el apartado 3, en particular la prestación de garantías suficientes de aplicación de medidas técnicas y organizativas apropiadas de manera que el tratamiento sea conforme con las disposiciones del presente Reglamento. Si ese otro encargado incumple sus obligaciones de protección de datos, el encargado inicial seguirá siendo plenamente responsable ante el responsable del tratamiento por lo que respecta al cumplimiento de las obligaciones del otro encargado.
|
|
Artículo 28 5.
|
La adhesión del encargado del tratamiento a un código de conducta aprobado a tenor del artículo 40 o a un mecanismo de certificación aprobado a tenor del artículo 42 podrá utilizarse como elemento para demostrar la existencia de las garantías suficientes a que se refieren los apartados 1 y 4 del presente artículo.
|
|
Artículo 28 6.
|
Sin perjuicio de que el responsable y el encargado del tratamiento celebren un contrato individual, el contrato u otro acto jurídico a que se refieren los apartados 3 y 4 del presente artículo podrá basarse, total o parcialmente, en las cláusulas contractuales tipo a que se refieren los apartados 7 y 8 del presente artículo, inclusive cuando formen parte de una certificación concedida al responsable o encargado de conformidad con los artículos 42 y 43.
|
|
Artículo 28 7.
|
La Comisión podrá fijar cláusulas contractuales tipo para los asuntos a que se refieren los apartados 3 y 4 del presente artículo, de acuerdo con el procedimiento de examen a que se refiere el artículo 93, apartado 2.
|
|
Artículo 28 8.
|
Una autoridad de control podrá adoptar cláusulas contractuales tipo para los asuntos a que se refieren los apartados 3 y 4 del presente artículo, de acuerdo con el mecanismo de coherencia a que se refiere el artículo 63.
|
|
Artículo 28 9.
|
El contrato u otro acto jurídico a que se refieren los apartados 3 y 4 constará por escrito, inclusive en formato electrónico.
|
|
Artículo 28 10.
|
Sin perjuicio de lo dispuesto en los artículos 82, 83 y 84, si un encargado del tratamiento infringe el presente Reglamento al determinar los fines y medios del tratamiento, será considerado responsable del tratamiento con respecto a dicho tratamiento.
|
,
1.1 Referencias
1.2 Requisitos identificados
1.3 Estándares relacionados
2. Requisitos identificados
Requisitos
| Fuente |
Requisito |
3. Estándares relacionados
Estándares
| Fuente |
Requisito |
|
SCF
|
Personal Data (PD) Inventory Automation Support
Description
Automated mechanisms exist to determine if Personal Data (PD) is maintained in electronic form.
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 automatically determine if Personal Data (PD) is maintained in electronic form.
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.
|
|
SCF
|
Data Privacy Requirements for Contractors & Service Providers
Description
Mechanisms exist to include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.
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 include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.
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 Privacy Requirements for Contractors & Service Providers
Description
Mechanisms exist to include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.
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 include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.
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.
|
|