+Članak 28. Izvršitelj obrade
---+Članak 28. 1.
---+Članak 28. 2.
---+Članak 28. 3.
---+Članak 28. 4.
---+Članak 28. 5.
---+Članak 28. 6.
---+Članak 28. 7.
---+Članak 28. 8.
---+Članak 28. 9.
---+Članak 28. 10.
|
Članak 28. Izvršitelj obrade
1. Pregled
| Naslov |
Regulativa |
|
Članak 28. 1.
|
Ako se obrada provodi u ime voditelja obrade, voditelj obrade koristi se jedino izvršiteljima obrade koji u dovoljnoj mjeri jamče provedbu odgovarajućih tehničkih i organizacijskih mjera na način da je obrada u skladu sa zahtjevima iz ove Uredbe i da se njome osigurava zaštita prava ispitanika.
|
|
Članak 28. 2.
|
Izvršitelj obrade ne smije angažirati drugog izvršitelja obrade bez prethodnog posebnog ili općeg pisanog odobrenja voditelja obrade. U slučaju općeg pisanog odobrenja, izvršitelj obrade obavješćuje voditelja obrade o svim planiranim izmjenama u vezi s dodavanjem ili zamjenom drugih izvršitelja obrade kako bi time voditelju obrade omogućio da uloži prigovor na takve izmjene.
|
|
Članak 28. 3.
|
Obrada koju provodi izvršitelj obrade uređuje se ugovorom ili drugim pravnim aktom u skladu s pravom Unije ili pravom države članice, koji izvršitelja obrade obvezuje prema voditelju obrade, a koji navodi predmet i trajanje obrade, prirodu i svrhu obrade, vrstu osobnih podataka i kategoriju ispitanika te obveze i prava voditelja obrade. Tim se ugovorom ili drugim pravnim aktom osobito određuje da izvršitelj obrade:
(a)
obrađuje osobne podatke samo prema zabilježenim uputama voditelja obrade, među ostalim s obzirom na prijenose osobnih podataka trećoj zemlji ili međunarodnoj organizaciji, osim ako to nalaže pravo Unije ili pravo države članice kojem podliježe izvršitelj obrade; u tom slučaju izvršitelj obrade izvješćuje voditelja obrade o tom pravnom zahtjevu prije obrade, osim ako se tim pravom zabranjuje takvo izvješćivanje zbog važnih razloga od javnog interesa;
(b)
osigurava da su se osobe ovlaštene za obradu osobnih podataka obvezale na poštovanje povjerljivosti ili da podliježu zakonskim obvezama o povjerljivosti;
(c)
poduzima sve potrebne mjere u skladu s člankom 32.;
(d)
poštuje uvjete iz stavaka 2. i 4. za angažiranje drugog izvršitelja obrade;
(e)
uzimajući u obzir prirodu obrade, pomaže voditelju obrade putem odgovarajućih tehničkih i organizacijskih mjera, koliko je to moguće, da ispuni obvezu voditelja obrade u pogledu odgovaranja na zahtjeve za ostvarivanje prava ispitanika koja su utvrđena u poglavlju III.;
(f)
pomaže voditelju obrade u osiguravanju usklađenosti s obvezama u skladu s člancima od 32. do 36., uzimajući u obzir prirodu obrade i informacije koje su dostupne izvršitelju obrade;
(g)
po izboru voditelja, briše ili vraća voditelju obrade sve osobne podatke nakon dovršetka pružanja usluga vezanih za obradu te briše postojeće kopije osim ako sukladno pravu Unije ili pravu države članice postoji obveza pohrane osobnih podataka;
(h)
voditelju obrade stavlja na raspolaganje sve informacije koje su neophodne za dokazivanje poštovanja obveza utvrđenih u ovom članku i koje omogućuju revizije, uključujući inspekcije, koje provodi voditelj obrade ili drugi revizor kojeg je ovlastio voditelj obrade, te im doprinose.
U pogledu točke (h) prvog podstavka, izvršitelj obrade odmah obavješćuje voditelja obrade ako prema njegovu mišljenju određena uputa krši ovu Uredbu ili druge odredbe Unije ili države članice o zaštiti podataka.
|
|
Članak 28. 4.
|
Ako izvršitelj obrade angažira drugog izvršitelja obrade za provođenje posebnih aktivnosti obrade u ime voditelja obrade, iste obveze za zaštitu podataka kao one koje su navedene u ugovoru ili drugom pravnom aktu između voditelja obrade i izvršitelja obrade iz stavka 3. nameću se tom drugom izvršitelju obrade ugovorom ili drugim pravnim aktom u skladu s pravom Unije ili pravom države članice, a osobito obveza davanja dostatnih jamstava za provedbu odgovarajućih tehničkih i organizacijskih mjera na način da se obradom udovoljava zahtjevima iz ove Uredbe. Ako taj drugi izvršitelj obrade ne ispunjava obveze zaštite podataka, početni izvršitelj obrade ostaje u cijelosti odgovoran voditelju obrade za izvršavanje obveza tog drugog izvršitelja obrade.
|
|
Članak 28. 5.
|
Poštovanje od strane izvršitelja obrade odobrenih kodeksa ponašanja iz članka 40. ili odobrenog mehanizma certificiranja iz članka 42. može se koristiti kao element za dokazivanje pružanja dovoljnih jamstava iz stavaka 1. i 4. ovog članka.
|
|
Članak 28. 6.
|
Ne dovodeći u pitanje pojedinačni ugovor između voditelja obrade i izvršitelja obrade, ugovor ili drugi pravni akt iz stavaka 3. i 4.ovog članka može se temeljiti, u cijelosti ili djelomično, na standardnim ugovornim klauzulama iz stavaka 7. i 8. ovog članka, među ostalim klauzulama koje su dio certifikata dodijeljenog voditelju obrade ili izvršitelju obrade u skladu s člancima 42. i 43.
|
|
Članak 28. 7.
|
Komisija može utvrditi standardne ugovorne klauzule za pitanja iz stavaka 3. i 4. ovog članka, a u skladu s postupkom ispitivanja iz članka 93. stavka 2.
|
|
Članak 28. 8.
|
Nadzorno tijelo može donijeti standardne ugovorne klauzule za pitanja iz stavka 3. i 4.ovog članka, a u skladu s mehanizmom za usklađivanje iz članka 63.
|
|
Članak 28. 9.
|
Ugovor ili drugi pravni akt iz stavaka 3. i 4. mora biti upisanom obliku, uključujući elektronički oblik.
|
|
Članak 28. 10.
|
Ne dovodeći u pitanje članke 82., 83. i 84., ako izvršitelj obrade krši ovu Uredbu utvrđivanjem svrhe i načine obrade podataka, izvršitelj obrade smatra se voditeljem obrade u pogledu te obrade.
|
,
1.1 Reference
1.2 Utvrđeni zahtjevi
1.3 Povezani standardi
2. Utvrđeni zahtjevi
3. Povezani standardi
Standardi
| Izvor |
Zahtjev |
|
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.
|
|