+49 artikla Erityistilanteita koskevat poikkeukset
---+49 artikla 1.
---+49 artikla 2.
---+49 artikla 3.
---+49 artikla 4.
---+49 artikla 5.
---+49 artikla 6.
|
49 artikla Erityistilanteita koskevat poikkeukset
-
1. Yleiskatsaus
| Otsikko |
Sääntely |
|
49 artikla 1.
|
Jos ei ole tehty 45 artiklan 3 kohdan mukaista tietosuojan tason riittävyyttä koskevaa päätöstä tai ei ole toteutettu 46 artiklassa tarkoitettuja asianmukaisia suojatoimia yritystä koskevat sitovat säännöt mukaan lukien, henkilötietojen siirrot tai siirtojen sarjat kolmanteen maahan tai kansainväliselle järjestölle voidaan suorittaa vain, jos jokin seuraavista edellytyksistä täyttyy:
▼B
a)
rekisteröity on antanut nimenomaisen suostumuksensa ehdotettuun siirtoon sen jälkeen, kun hänelle on ilmoitettu, että tällaiset siirrot voivat aiheuttaa rekisteröidylle riskejä tietosuojan tason riittävyyttä koskevan päätöksen ja asianmukaisten suojatoimien puuttumisen vuoksi;
b)
siirto on tarpeen rekisteröidyn ja rekisterinpitäjän välisen sopimuksen täytäntöönpanemiseksi tai sopimuksen tekemistä edeltävien toimenpiteiden toteuttamiseksi rekisteröidyn pyynnöstä;
c)
siirto on tarpeen rekisterinpitäjän ja toisen luonnollisen henkilön tai oikeushenkilön välisen, rekisteröidyn edun mukaisen sopimuksen tekemiseksi tai täytäntöönpanemiseksi;
▼C2
d)
siirto on tarpeen yleistä etua koskevien tärkeiden syiden vuoksi;
▼B
e)
siirto on tarpeen oikeusvaateen laatimiseksi, esittämiseksi tai puolustamiseksi;
f)
siirto on tarpeen rekisteröidyn tai muiden henkilöiden elintärkeiden etujen suojaamiseksi, jos rekisteröity on fyysisesti tai juridisesti estynyt antamasta suostumustaan;
g)
siirto tehdään rekisteristä, jonka tarkoituksena on unionin oikeuden tai jäsenvaltion lainsäädännön mukaan tietojen antaminen yleisölle ja joka on yleisesti yleisön tai kenen tahansa sellaisen henkilön käytettävissä, joka voi esittää tiedonsaannille perustellun syyn, mutta ainoastaan siltä osin kuin rekisterin käytön edellytykset, joista säädetään unionin oikeudessa tai jäsenvaltion lainsäädännössä, täyttyvät kussakin yksittäisessä tapauksessa.
Jos siirto ei voi perustua 45 tai 46 artiklassa oleviin sääntöihin, kuten yritystä koskeviin sitoviin sääntöihin, eikä mikään tämän kohdan ensimmäisen alakohdan mukaisista erityistilanteita koskevista poikkeuksista sovellu, henkilötietoja voidaan siirtää kolmanteen maahan tai kansainväliselle järjestölle ainoastaan, jos siirto ei ole toistuva, koskee ainoastaan rajallista määrää rekisteröityjä ja on tarpeen rekisterinpitäjän sellaisten pakottavien ja oikeutettujen etujen toteuttamiseksi, joita rekisteröidyn edut tai perusoikeudet ja -vapaudet eivät syrjäytä, sekä jos rekisterinpitäjä on arvioinut kaikkia tiedonsiirtoon liittyviä seikkoja ja toteuttanut tämän arvioinnin perusteella henkilötietojen suojaa koskevat asianmukaiset suojatoimet. Rekisterinpitäjän on ilmoitettava siirrosta valvontaviranomaiselle. Edellä 13 ja 14 artiklassa mainittujen tietojen lisäksi rekisterinpitäjän on annettava rekisteröidylle tiedot siirrosta sekä pakottavista ja oikeutetuista eduista.
|
|
49 artikla 2.
|
Edellä olevan 1 kohdan ensimmäisen alakohdan g alakohdan mukainen siirto ei saa käsittää rekisteriin sisältyviä henkilötietoja kokonaisuudessaan eikä kokonaisia henkilötietoryhmiä. Jos rekisteri on tarkoitettu sellaisten henkilöiden käyttöön, joilla on siihen oikeutettu etu, siirto tehdään ainoastaan näiden henkilöiden pyynnöstä tai jos he ovat henkilötietojen vastaanottajia.
|
|
49 artikla 3.
|
Edellä olevan 1 kohdan ensimmäisen alakohdan a, b ja c alakohtaa ja toista alakohtaa ei sovelleta toimiin, joita viranomaiset suorittavat osana julkisen vallan käyttöä.
|
|
49 artikla 4.
|
Edellä 1 kohdan ensimmäisen alakohdan d alakohdassa tarkoitettu yleinen etu on tunnustettava unionin oikeudessa tai sen jäsenvaltion lainsäädännössä, jota rekisterinpitäjään sovelletaan.
|
|
49 artikla 5.
|
Ellei tietosuojan riittävyyttä koskevaa päätöstä ole annettu, unionin oikeudessa tai jäsenvaltion lainsäädännössä voidaan tärkeää yleistä etua koskevista syistä nimenomaisesti rajoittaa tiettyjen henkilötietoryhmien siirtoa kolmanteen maahan tai kansainväliselle järjestölle. Jäsenvaltioiden on ilmoitettava tällaisista säännöksistä komissiolle.
|
|
49 artikla 6.
|
Rekisterinpitäjän tai henkilötietojen käsittelijän on dokumentoitava arviointi ja tämän artiklan 1 kohdan toisessa alakohdassa tarkoitetut asianmukaiset suojatoimet 30 artiklassa tarkoitettuun selosteeseen.
|
,
1.1 Viittaukset
1.2 Tunnistetut vaatimukset
1.3 Liittyvät standardit
2. Tunnistetut vaatimukset
Vaatimukset
| Lähde |
Vaatimus |
3. Liittyvät standardit
Standardit
| Lähde |
Vaatimus |
|
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.
|
|