+Article 49 Dérogations pour des situations particulières
---+Article 49 1.
---+Article 49 2.
---+Article 49 3.
---+Article 49 4.
---+Article 49 5.
---+Article 49 6.
|
Article 49 Dérogations pour des situations particulières
-
1. Vue d’ensemble
| Intitulé |
Réglementation |
|
Article 49 1.
|
En l'absence de décision d'adéquation en vertu de l'article 45, paragraphe 3, ou de garanties appropriées en vertu de l'article 46, y compris des règles d'entreprise contraignantes, un transfert ou un ensemble de transferts de données à caractère personnel vers un pays tiers ou à une organisation internationale ne peut avoir lieu qu'à l'une des conditions suivantes:
a)
la personne concernée a donné son consentement explicite au transfert envisagé, après avoir été informée des risques que ce transfert pouvait comporter pour elle en raison de l'absence de décision d'adéquation et de garanties appropriées;
b)
le transfert est nécessaire à l'exécution d'un contrat entre la personne concernée et le responsable du traitement ou à la mise en œuvre de mesures précontractuelles prises à la demande de la personne concernée;
c)
le transfert est nécessaire à la conclusion ou à l'exécution d'un contrat conclu dans l'intérêt de la personne concernée entre le responsable du traitement et une autre personne physique ou morale;
d)
le transfert est nécessaire pour des motifs importants d'intérêt public;
e)
le transfert est nécessaire à la constatation, à l'exercice ou à la défense de droits en justice;
f)
le transfert est nécessaire à la sauvegarde des intérêts vitaux de la personne concernée ou d'autres personnes, lorsque la personne concernée se trouve dans l'incapacité physique ou juridique de donner son consentement;
g)
le transfert a lieu au départ d'un registre qui, conformément au droit de l'Union ou au droit d'un État membre, est destiné à fournir des 'informations au public et est ouvert à la consultation du public en général ou de toute personne justifiant d'un intérêt légitime, mais uniquement dans la mesure où les conditions prévues pour la consultation dans le droit de l'Union ou le droit de l'État membre sont remplies dans le cas d'espèce.
Lorsqu'un transfert ne peut pas être fondé sur une disposition de l'article 45 ou 46, y compris les dispositions relatives aux règles d'entreprise contraignantes, et qu'aucune des dérogations pour des situations particulières visées au premier alinéa du présent paragraphe n'est applicable, un transfert vers un pays tiers ou à une organisation internationale ne peut avoir lieu que si ce transfert ne revêt pas de caractère répétitif, ne touche qu'un nombre limité de personnes concernées, est nécessaire aux fins des intérêts légitimes impérieux poursuivis par le responsable du traitement sur lesquels ne prévalent pas les intérêts ou les droits et libertés de la personne concernée, et si le responsable du traitement a évalué toutes les circonstances entourant le transfert de données et a offert, sur la base de cette évaluation, des garanties appropriées en ce qui concerne la protection des données à caractère personnel. Le responsable du traitement informe l'autorité de contrôle du transfert. Outre qu'il fournit les informations visées aux articles 13 et 14, le responsable du traitement informe la personne concernée du transfert et des intérêts légitimes impérieux qu'il poursuit.
|
|
Article 49 2.
|
Un transfert effectué en vertu du paragraphe 1, premier alinéa, point g), ne porte pas sur la totalité des données à caractère personnel ni sur des catégories entières de données à caractère personnel contenues dans le registre. Lorsque le registre est destiné à être consulté par des personnes justifiant d'un intérêt légitime, le transfert n'est effectué qu'à la demande de ces personnes ou lorsqu'elles en sont les destinataires.
|
|
Article 49 3.
|
Les points a), b), et c) du premier alinéa du paragraphe 1 et le deuxième alinéa du paragraphe 1 ne sont pas applicables aux activités des autorités publiques dans l'exercice de leurs prérogatives de puissance publique.
|
|
Article 49 4.
|
L'intérêt public visé au paragraphe 1, premier alinéa, point d), est reconnu par le droit de l'Union ou le droit de l'État membre auquel le responsable du traitement est soumis.
|
|
Article 49 5.
|
En l'absence de décision d'adéquation, le droit de l'Union ou le droit d'un État membre peut, pour des motifs importants d'intérêt public, fixer expressément des limites au transfert de catégories spécifiques de données à caractère personnel vers un pays tiers ou à une organisation internationale. Les États membres notifient de telles dispositions à la Commission.
|
|
Article 49 6.
|
Le responsable du traitement ou le sous-traitant documente, dans les registres visés à l'article 30, l'évaluation ainsi que les garanties appropriées visées au paragraphe 1, deuxième alinéa, du présent article.
|
,
1.1 Références
1.2 Exigences identifiées
1.3 Normes associées
2. Exigences identifiées
Exigences
| Source |
Exigence |
3. Normes associées
Normes
| Source |
Exigence |
|
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.
|
|