+Artikkel 49 Erandid konkreetsetes olukordades
---+Artikkel 49 1.
---+Artikkel 49 2.
---+Artikkel 49 3.
---+Artikkel 49 4.
---+Artikkel 49 5.
---+Artikkel 49 6.
|
Artikkel 49 Erandid konkreetsetes olukordades
-
1. Ülevaade
| Pealkiri |
Regulatsioon |
|
Artikkel 49 1.
|
Artikli 45 lõike 3 kohase kaitse piisavuse otsuse või artikli 46 kohaste asjakohaste kaitsemeetmete, sealhulgas siduvate kontsernisiseste eeskirjade puudumise korral võib kolmandale riigile või rahvusvahelisele organisatsioonile isikuandmete ühekordne või korduv edastamine olla lubatud ainult ühel järgmistest tingimustest:
a)
andmesubjekt on edastamiseks andnud selgesõnalise nõusoleku pärast seda, kui teda teavitati sellise edastamisega tema jaoks kaasnevatest võimalikest ohtudest, mis tulenevad kaitse piisavuse otsuse ja asjaomaste kaitsemeetmete puudumisest;
b)
edastamine on vajalik andmesubjekti ja vastutava töötleja vahelise lepingu täitmiseks või andmesubjekti taotluse alusel võetavate lepingueelsete meetmete rakendamiseks;
c)
edastamine on vajalik, et andmesubjekti huvides sõlmida vastutava töötleja ja muu füüsilise või juriidilise isiku vahel leping või seda lepingut täita;
d)
edastamine on vajalik avalikust huvist tulenevatel kaalukatel põhjustel;
e)
edastamine on vajalik õigusnõuete koostamiseks, esitamiseks või kaitsmiseks;
f)
edastamine on vajalik, et kaitsta andmesubjekti või muude isikute olulisi huve, kui andmesubjekt on füüsiliselt või õiguslikult võimetu nõusolekut andma;
g)
edastamine tehakse registrist, mis liidu või liikmesriigi õiguse kohaselt on mõeldud avalikkuse teavitamiseks ja on tutvumiseks avatud kas laiemale avalikkusele või kõigile, kes suudavad tõendada õigustatud huvi, kuid ainult sellisel määral, nagu konkreetsel juhul on täidetud tutvumist käsitlevad tingimused, mis on liidu või liikmesriigi õigusega ette nähtud.
Kui edastamise aluseks ei saa olla artikli 45 või 46 sätted, sealhulgas siduvaid kontsernisiseseid eeskirju käsitlevad sätted, ning kui ükski käesoleva lõike esimese lõigu kohane konkreetseks olukorraks ette nähtud erand ei ole kohaldatav, võib kolmandale riigile või rahvusvahelisele organisatsioonile andmeid edastada üksnes juhul, kui edastamine ei ole korduv, puudutab ainult piiratud arvu andmesubjekte, on vajalik, et kaitsta vastutava töötleja õigustatud huve, mille suhtes andmesubjekti huvid, õigused või vabadused ei ole ülekaalus ning kui vastutav töötleja on hinnanud kõiki andmete edastamisega seotud asjaolusid ja kehtestanud selle hinnangu põhjal sobivad kaitsemeetmed isikuandmete kaitseks. Vastutav töötleja teatab edastamisest järelevalveasutusele. Lisaks artiklites 13 ja 14 osutatud teabele teavitab vastutav töötleja andmesubjekte edastamisest ja vastutava töötleja poolt kaitstavatest õigustatud huvidest.
|
|
Artikkel 49 2.
|
Lõike 1 esimese lõigu punkti g kohane edastamine ei hõlma kõiki registris sisalduvaid isikuandmeid ega kõiki isikuandmete liike. Kui register on ette nähtud tutvumiseks õigustatud huviga isikutele, toimub edastamine vaid nende isikute taotlusel või juhul, kui nemad on vastuvõtjad.
|
|
Artikkel 49 3.
|
Lõike 1 esimese lõigu punkte a, b ja c ning lõike 1 teist lõiku ei kohaldata avalikku võimu teostavate riigiasutuste toimingute suhtes.
|
|
Artikkel 49 4.
|
Lõike 1 esimese lõigu punktis d osutatud avalik huvi on tunnustatud liidu õiguses või selle liikmesriigi õiguses, mida vastutava töötaja suhtes kohaldatakse.
|
|
Artikkel 49 5.
|
Kaitse piisavuse otsuse puudumise korral võib avalikust huvist tulenevatel kaalukatel põhjustel liidu või liikmesriigi õigusega selgesõnaliselt seada piirangud eri liiki isikuandmete edastamiseks kolmandale riigile või rahvusvahelisele organisatsioonile. Liikmesriigid teatavad sellistest sätetest komisjonile.
|
|
Artikkel 49 6.
|
Vastutav töötleja või volitatud töötleja kannab artiklis 30 osutatud registrisse hindamise ja käesoleva artikli lõike 1 teises lõigus osutatud sobivad kaitsemeetmed.
|
,
1.1 Viited
1.2 Tuvastatud nõuded
1.3 Seotud standardid
2. Tuvastatud nõuded
3. Seotud standardid
Standardid
| Allikas |
Nõue |
|
SCF
|
Ad-Hoc Transfers
Description
Mechanisms exist to secure ad-hoc exchanges of large digital files with internal or external parties.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Data classification program ∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) ∙ Content / DNS filtering
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Data classification program ∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) ∙ Content / DNS filtering
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Data classification program ∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) ∙ Content / DNS filtering
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Data classification program ∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) ∙ Content / DNS filtering∙ Data governance program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Data classification program ∙ Secure Baseline Configurations (SBC) ∙ Content / DNS filtering∙ Data governance program
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
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with DCH domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ Data management-related activities are decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices. ▪ Restrictions for ad-hoc data transfers are primarily administrative in nature (e.g., policies & standards).
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Data classification and handling-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Data classification and handling management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ A formalized data classification scheme exists to identify categories of data, based on protection requirements from applicable laws, regulations and/or contractual obligations. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to document where sensitive/regulated data is stored, transmitted and/or processed.
Level 3 Well Defined
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain DCH domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data classification and handling operations (e.g., GRC platform). ▪ 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 DCH 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 secure ad-hoc exchanges of large digital files with internal or external parties.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes. ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
|
|
SCF
|
External Transfer of Sensitive / Regulated Data
Description
Mechanisms exist to restrict and govern the transfer of sensitive and/or regulated data: (1) Cross-border; and/or (2) Interorganizational.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Model contracts ∙ Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Model contracts ∙ Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Model contracts ∙ Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Model contracts ∙ Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Model contracts ∙ Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
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
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Data classification and handling-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Data classification and handling management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ A formalized data classification scheme exists to identify categories of data, based on protection requirements from applicable laws, regulations and/or contractual obligations.
Level 3 Well Defined
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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 DCH 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 DCH domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain DCH domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data classification and handling operations (e.g., GRC platform). ▪ 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 DCH 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 restrict and govern the transfer of sensitive and/or regulated data to third-countries or international organizations.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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
Data Classification & Handling (DCH) 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. ▪ Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes. ▪ Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions via Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) technologies.
|
|