+Artikkel 28 Volitatud töötleja
---+Artikkel 28 1.
---+Artikkel 28 2.
---+Artikkel 28 3.
---+Artikkel 28 4.
---+Artikkel 28 5.
---+Artikkel 28 6.
---+Artikkel 28 7.
---+Artikkel 28 8.
---+Artikkel 28 9.
---+Artikkel 28 10.
|
Artikkel 28 Volitatud töötleja
-
1. Ülevaade
| Pealkiri |
Regulatsioon |
|
Artikkel 28 1.
|
Kui töödeldakse vastutava töötleja nimel, kasutab vastutav töötleja ainult selliseid volitatud töötlejaid, kes annavad piisava tagatise, et nad rakendavad asjakohaseid tehnilisi ja korralduslikke meetmeid sellisel viisil, et töötlemine vastab käesoleva määruse nõuetele ja sealjuures tagatakse andmesubjekti õiguste kaitse.
|
|
Artikkel 28 2.
|
Volitatud töötleja ei kaasa teist volitatud töötlejat ilma vastutava töötleja eelneva konkreetse või üldise kirjaliku loata. Üldise kirjaliku loa korral teavitab volitatud töötleja vastutavat töötlejat kõigist kavandatavatest muudatustest, mis puudutavad teiste volitatud töötlejate lisamist või asendamist, andes seeläbi vastutavale töötlejale võimaluse esitada selliste muudatuste suhtes vastuväiteid.
|
|
Artikkel 28 3.
|
Volitatud töötleja töötleb andmeid volitatud töötlejat ja vastutavat töötlejat omavahel siduva lepingu või liidu või liikmesriigi õiguse kohase siduva õigusakti alusel, mis on volitatud töötleja suhtes siduv ning milles sätestatakse töötlemise sisu ja kestus, töötlemise laad ja eesmärk, isikuandmete liik ja andmesubjektide kategooriad, vastutava töötleja kohustused ja õigused. Kõnealuses lepingus või muus õigusaktis sätestatakse eelkõige see, et volitatud töötleja:
a)
töötleb isikuandmeid ainult vastutava töötleja dokumenteeritud juhiste alusel, sealhulgas seoses isikuandmete edastamisega kolmandale riigile või rahvusvahelisele organisatsioonile, välja arvatud juhul, kui ta on kohustatud seda tegema volitatud töötleja suhtes kohaldatava liidu või liikmesriigi õigusega; sellisel juhul teatab volitatud töötleja selle õigusliku nõude enne isikuandmete töötlemist vastutavale töötlejale, kui selline teatamine ei ole olulise avaliku huvi tõttu kõnealuse õigusega keelatud;
b)
tagab, et isikuandmeid töötlema volitatud isikud on kohustunud järgima konfidentsiaalsusnõuet või nende suhtes kehtib asjakohane põhikirjajärgne konfidentsiaalsuskohustus;
c)
võtab kõik artikli 32 kohaselt nõutavad meetmed;
d)
järgib lõigetes 2 ja 4 osutatud tingimusi teise volitatud töötleja kaasamiseks;
e)
võttes arvesse isikuandmete töötlemise laadi, aitab võimaluse piires vastutaval töötlejal asjakohaste tehniliste ja korralduslike meetmete abil täita vastutava töötleja kohustust vastata taotlustele III peatükis sätestatud andmesubjekti õiguste teostamiseks;
f)
aitab vastutaval töötlejal täita artiklites 32–36 sätestatud kohustusi, võttes arvesse isikuandmete töötlemise laadi ja volitatud töötlejale kättesaadavat teavet;
g)
pärast andmetöötlusteenuste osutamise lõppu kustutab või tagastab vastutavale töötlejale vastutava töötleja valikul kõik isikuandmed ja kustutab olemasolevad koopiad, välja arvatud juhul, kui liidu või liikmesriigi õiguse kohaselt nõutakse andmete säilitamist;
h)
teeb vastutavale töötlejale kättesaadavaks kogu teabe, mis on vajalik käesolevas artiklis sätestatud kohustuste täitmise tõendamiseks, ning võimaldab vastutaval töötlejal või tema poolt volitatud muul audiitoril teha auditeid, sealhulgas kontrolle, ja panustab sellesse.
Esimese lõigu punkti h osas teavitab volitatud töötleja vastutavat töötlejat kohe, kui korraldus läheb tema arvates vastuollu käesoleva määruse või liikmesriigi või liidu muude andmekaitsealaste sätetega.
|
|
Artikkel 28 4.
|
Kui volitatud töötleja kaasab vastutava töötleja nimel konkreetsete isikuandmete töötlemise toimingute tegemiseks teise volitatud töötleja, nähakse lepingus või muus liidu või liikmesriigi õiguse kohases õigusaktis asjaomase teise volitatud töötleja suhtes ette samad andmekaitsekohustused, mis on sätestatud lõikes 3 osutatud vastutava töötleja ja volitatud töötleja vahelises lepingus või muus õigusaktis; eelkõige annab see piisava tagatise, et rakendatakse asjakohaseid tehnilisi ja korralduslikke meetmeid sellisel viisil, et töötlemine vastaks käesoleva määruse nõuetele. Kui see teine volitatud töötleja ei täida oma andmekaitsekohustusi, jääb algne volitatud töötleja vastutava töötleja ees täielikult vastutavaks kõnealuse teise volitatud töötleja kohustuste täitmise eest.
|
|
Artikkel 28 5.
|
Volitatud töötleja poolt artiklis 40 osutatud heakskiidetud toimimisjuhendite või artiklis 42 osutatud heakskiidetud sertifitseerimismehhanismi järgimist võib kasutada elemendina selleks, et tõendada käesoleva artikli lõigetes 1 ja 4 osutatud piisava tagatise olemasolu.
|
|
Artikkel 28 6.
|
Ilma et see mõjutaks vastutava töötleja ja volitatud töötleja vahelist individuaalset lepingut, võib käesoleva artikli lõigetes 3 ja 4 osutatud leping või muu õigusliku toimega dokument põhineda täielikult või osaliselt käesoleva artikli lõigetes 7 ja 8 osutatud lepingu tüüptingimustel, sealhulgas kui need on osa vastutavale töötlejale või volitatud töötlejale artiklite 42 ja 43 kohaselt antud sertifikaadist.
|
|
Artikkel 28 7.
|
Komisjon võib sätestada lepingu tüüptingimused käesoleva artikli lõigetes 3 ja 4 osutatud küsimustes ja kooskõlas artikli 93 lõikes 2 osutatud kontrollimenetlusega.
|
|
Artikkel 28 8.
|
Järelevalveasutus võib vastu võtta lepingu tüüptingimused käesoleva artikli lõigetes 3 ja 4 osutatud küsimustes ja kooskõlas artiklis 63 osutatud järjepidevuse mehhanismiga.
|
|
Artikkel 28 9.
|
Lõigetes 3 ja 4 osutatud leping või muu õigusliku toimega dokument peab olema kirjalik, sealhulgas elektroonilisel kujul.
|
|
Artikkel 28 10.
|
Kui volitatud töötleja määrab käesolevat määrust rikkudes andmete töötlemise eesmärgid ja vahendid, siis loetakse volitatud töötleja selle töötlemise suhtes vastutavaks töötlejaks, ilma et see piiraks artiklite 82, 83 ja 84 kohaldamist.
|
,
1.1 Viited
1.2 Tuvastatud nõuded
1.3 Seotud standardid
2. Tuvastatud nõuded
3. Seotud standardid
Standardid
| Allikas |
Nõue |
|
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.
|
|