+28. pants Apstrādātājs
---+28. pants 1.
---+28. pants 2.
---+28. pants 3.
---+28. pants 4.
---+28. pants 5.
---+28. pants 6.
---+28. pants 7.
---+28. pants 8.
---+28. pants 9.
---+28. pants 10.
|
28. pants Apstrādātājs
-
1. Pārskats
| Nosaukums |
Regulējums |
|
28. pants 1.
|
Gadījumos, kad apstrāde ir jāveic pārziņa vārdā, pārzinis izmanto tikai tādus apstrādātājus, kas sniedz pietiekamas garantijas, ka tiks īstenoti atbilstoši tehniskie un organizatoriskie pasākumi tādā veidā, ka apstrādē tiks ievērotas šīs regulas prasības un tiks nodrošināta datu subjekta tiesību aizsardzība.
|
|
28. pants 2.
|
Apstrādātājs bez iepriekšējas konkrētas vai vispārējas rakstiskas pārziņa atļaujas nepiesaista citu apstrādātāju. Vispārējas rakstiskas atļaujas gadījumā apstrādātājs informē pārzini par jebkādām iecerētām pārmaiņām saistībā ar papildu apstrādātāju vai apstrādātāja aizstāšanu, tādējādi sniedzot pārzinim iespēju iebilst pret šādām izmaiņām.
|
|
28. pants 3.
|
Apstrādi, ko veic apstrādātājs, reglamentē ar līgumu vai ar citu juridisku aktu saskaņā ar Savienības vai dalībvalsts tiesību aktiem, kas ir saistošs apstrādātājam un pārzinim un kurā norāda līguma priekšmetu un apstrādes ilgumu, apstrādes raksturu un nolūku, personas datu veidu un datu subjektu kategorijas un pārziņa pienākumus un tiesības. Minētais līgums vai cits juridiskais akts jo īpaši paredz, ka apstrādātājs:
a)
personas datus apstrādā tikai pēc pārziņa dokumentētiem norādījumiem, tostarp saistībā ar nosūtīšanu uz trešo valsti vai starptautisku organizāciju, izņemot, ja tas ir jādara saskaņā ar Savienības vai dalībvalsts tiesību aktiem, kas piemērojami apstrādātājam, un šādā gadījumā apstrādātājs par minēto juridisko prasību informē pārzini pirms apstrādes, izņemot, ja ar attiecīgo tiesību aktu šāda informēšana ir aizliegta svarīgu sabiedrības interešu dēļ;
b)
nodrošina, ka personas, kuras ir pilnvarotas apstrādāt datus, ir apņēmušās ievērot konfidencialitāti vai tām ir noteikts attiecīgs likumisks pienākums ievērot konfidencialitāti;
c)
īsteno visus pasākumus, kas nepieciešami saskaņā ar 32. pantu;
d)
ievēro 2. un 4. punktā minētos nosacījumus, saskaņā ar kuriem tiek piesaistīts cits apstrādātājs;
e)
ciktāl tas ir iespējams ņemot vērā apstrādes būtību, palīdz pārzinim ar atbilstīgiem tehniskiem un organizatoriskiem pasākumiem, kas nodrošina, ka pārzinis var izpildīt savu pienākumu atbildēt uz pieprasījumiem par III nodaļā paredzēto datu subjekta tiesību īstenošanu;
f)
palīdz pārzinim nodrošināt 32. līdz 36. pantā minēto pienākumu izpildi, ņemot vērā apstrādes veidu un apstrādātājam pieejamo informāciju;
g)
pēc apstrādes pakalpojumu sniegšanas pabeigšanas pēc pārziņa izvēles dzēš vai atdod visus personas datus un dzēš esošās kopijas, ja vien Savienības vai dalībvalsts tiesību aktos nav paredzēta personas datu glabāšana;
h)
pārzinim dara pieejamu visu informāciju, kas nepieciešama, lai apliecinātu, ka tiek pildīti šajā pantā paredzētie pienākumi, un lai ļautu pārzinim vai citam pārziņa pilnvarotam revidentam veikt revīzijas, tostarp pārbaudes, un sniegtu tajās ieguldījumu.
Attiecībā uz pirmās daļas h) apakšpunktu apstrādātājs nekavējoties informē pārzini, ja, viņaprāt, kāds norādījums pārkāpj šo regulu vai citus Savienības vai dalībvalstu datu aizsardzības noteikumus.
|
|
28. pants 4.
|
Ja apstrādātājs ar līgumu vai citu juridisku aktu saskaņā ar Savienības vai dalībvalsts tiesību aktiem piesaista citu apstrādātāju konkrētu apstrādes darbību veikšanai pārziņa vārdā, šim citam apstrādātājam nosaka tos pašus datu aizsardzības pienākumus, kas noteikti līgumā vai citā juridiskā aktā, kas noslēgts starp pārzini un apstrādātāju, kā minēts 3. punktā, jo īpaši pietiekami garantējot, ka tiks īstenoti piemēroti tehniskie un organizatoriskie pasākumi tādā veidā, lai apstrādē tiktu ievērotas šajā regulā noteiktās prasības. Ja minētais cits apstrādātājs nepilda savus datu aizsardzības pienākumus, sākotnējais apstrādātājs paliek pilnībā atbildīgs pārzinim par šā cita apstrādātāja pienākumu izpildi.
|
|
28. pants 5.
|
Apstrādātāja atbilstību apstiprinātam rīcības kodeksam, kā minēts 40. pantā, vai apstiprinātam sertifikācijas mehānismam, kā minēts 42. pantā, var izmantot kā elementu, ar ko apliecina šā panta 1. un 4. punktā minētās pietiekamās garantijas.
|
|
28. pants 6.
|
Neskarot atsevišķu līgumu starp pārzini un apstrādātāju, šā panta 3. un 4. punktā minēto līgumu vai citu juridisku aktu var pilnībā vai daļēji balstīt uz šā panta 7. un 8. punktā minētajām līguma standartklauzulām, tostarp ja tās ir daļa no sertifikāta, kurš pārzinim vai apstrādātājam piešķirts saskaņā ar 42. un 43. pantu.
|
|
28. pants 7.
|
Komisija var izstrādāt līguma standartklauzulas šā panta 3. un 4. punktā minētajiem jautājumiem saskaņā ar pārbaudes procedūru, kas minēta 93. panta 2. punktā.
|
|
28. pants 8.
|
Uzraudzības iestāde var pieņemt līguma standartklauzulas šā panta 3. un 4. punktā minētajiem jautājumiem saskaņā ar konsekvences mehānismu, kas minēts 63. pantā.
|
|
28. pants 9.
|
Šā panta 3. un 4. punktā minētais līgums vai cits juridiskais akts ir sagatavots rakstiskā formā, tostarp elektroniski.
|
|
28. pants 10.
|
Neskarot 82., 83. un 84. pantu – ja apstrādātājs pārkāpj šo regulu, nosakot apstrādes nolūkus un līdzekļus, apstrādātāju uzskata par pārzini attiecībā uz minēto apstrādi.
|
,
1.1 Atsauces
1.2 Identificētās prasības
1.3 Saistītie standarti
2. Identificētās prasības
3. Saistītie standarti
Standarti
| Avots |
Prasība |
|
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.
|
|