+Artikolu 28 Proċessur
---+Artikolu 28 1.
---+Artikolu 28 2.
---+Artikolu 28 3.
---+Artikolu 28 4.
---+Artikolu 28 5.
---+Artikolu 28 6.
---+Artikolu 28 7.
---+Artikolu 28 8.
---+Artikolu 28 9.
---+Artikolu 28 10.
|
Artikolu 28 Proċessur
-
1. Ħarsa ġenerali
| Titlu |
Regolamentazzjoni |
|
Artikolu 28 1.
|
Fejn l-ipproċessar ikun ser isir f'isem kontrollur, il-kontrollur għandu juża biss proċessuri li jagħtu garanziji suffiċjenti biex jiġu implimentati miżuri tekniċi u organizzattivi xierqa b'tali mod li l-ipproċessar jissodisfa r-rekwiżiti ta' dan ir-Regolament u jiżgura l-protezzjoni tad-drittijiet tas-suġġett tad-data.
|
|
Artikolu 28 2.
|
Il-proċessur m'għandux jimpjega proċessur ieħor mingħajr l-awtorizzazzjoni bil-miktub, speċifika jew ġenerali, minn qabel tal-kontrollur. Fil-każ tal-awtorizzazzjoni ġenerali bil-miktub, il-proċessur għandu jgħarraf lill-kontrollur bi kwalunkwe intenzjoni ta' tibdil rigward iż-żieda jew is-sostituzzjoni ta' proċessuri oħrajn, biex b'hekk jagħti l-opportunità lill-kontrollur joġġezzjona għal tali bidliet.
|
|
Artikolu 28 3.
|
L-ipproċessar minn proċessur għandu jkun regolat minn kuntratt jew att legali ieħor taħt il-liġi tal-Unjoni jew ta' Stat Membru, li jorbot lill-proċessur fir-rigward tal-kontrollur, u li jistabbilixxi s-suġġett u t-tul tal-ipproċessar, in-natura u l-għan tal-ipproċessar, it-tip ta' data personali u l-kategoriji tas-suġġetti tad-data u l-obbligi u d-drittijiet tal-kontrollur. Dak il-kuntratt jew att legali ieħor għandu jistipula, b'mod partikolari, li l-proċessur:
(a)
jipproċessa d-data personali fil-każ biss ta' istruzzjonijiet dokumentati mill-kontrollur, inkluż fir-rigward tat-trasferimenti tad-data personali lil pajjiż terz jew organizzazzjoni internazzjonali, ħlief jekk ikun obbligat jagħmel dan skont il-liġi tal-Unjoni jew ta' Stat Membru li l-proċessur ikun soġġett għalih; f'dak il-każ, il-proċessur għandu jinforma lill-kontrollur b'dak ir-rekwiżit legali qabel l-ipproċessar, ħlief jekk dik il-liġi tipprojbixxi dik l-informazzjoni għal raġunijiet importanti ta' interess pubbliku;
(b)
jiżgura li l-persuni awtorizzati biex jipproċessaw id-data personali jkunu impenjaw ruħhom li jżommu l-kunfidenzjalità jew li jkunu taħt obbligu statutorju xieraq ta' kunfidenzjalità;
(c)
jieħu l-miżuri kollha mitluba skont l-Artikolu 32;
(d)
jirrispetta l-kundizzjonijiet imsemmija fil-paragrafi 2 u 4 għall-impjegar ta' proċessur ieħor;
(e)
jieħu kont tan-natura tal-ipproċessar, jassisti lill-kontrollur permezz ta' miżuri tekniċi u organizzattivi xierqa, sa fejn dan ikun possibbli, għat-twettiq tal-obbligu tal-kontrollur li jwieġeb għat-talbiet tal-eżerċitar tad-drittijiet tas-suġġett tad-data mniżżla fil-Kapitolu III;
(f)
jassisti lill-kontrollur sabiex jassigura l-konformità mal-obbligi skont l-Artikoli 32 sa 36 waqt li titqies in-natura tal-ipproċessar u l-informazzjoni disponibbli lill-proċessur;
(g)
fuq l-għażla tal-kontrollur, iħassar jew jirritorna d-data personali kollha lill-kontrollur wara li jintemm il-forniment ta' servizzi relatati mal-ipproċessar ta' data, u jħassar il-kopji eżistenti sakemm il-liġi tal-Unjoni jew ta' Stat Membru ma tirrikjedix li d-data personali tinħażen;
(h)
jagħmel disponibbli għall-kontrollur kull informazzjoni meħtieġa biex tintwera l-konformità mal-obbligi stabbiliti f'dan l-Artikolu u jippermetti u jikkontribwixxi għal verifiki, inklużi ispezzjonijiet imwettqa mill-kontrollur jew minn awditur ieħor li jkun ingħata l-mandat mill-kontrollur.
Fir-rigward tal-punt (h) tal-ewwel subparagrafu, il-proċessur għandu minnufih jgħarraf lill-kontrollur jekk, fl-opinjoni tiegħu, istruzzjoni tikser dan ir-Regolament jew dispożizzjonijiet oħrajn tal-Unjoni jew ta' Stat Membru dwar il-protezzjoni tad-data.
|
|
Artikolu 28 4.
|
Fejn proċessur jimpjega proċessur ieħor biex iwettaq attivitajiet speċifiċi ta' pproċessar f'isem il-kontrollur, l-istess obbligi ta' protezzjoni tad-data kif jinsabu fil-kuntratt jew att legali ieħor bejn il-kontrollur u l-proċessur kif imsemmijin fil-paragrafu 3 għandhom jiġu imposti fuq dak il-proċessur l-ieħor permezz ta' kuntratt jew att legali ieħor skont il-liġi tal-Unjoni jew ta' Stat Membru, li b'mod partikolari jagħtu garanziji suffiċjenti biex jiġu implimentati miżuri tekniċi u organizzattivi xierqa b'tali mod li l-ipproċessar jissodisfa r-rekwiżiti ta' dan ir-Regolament. Fejn dak il-proċessur l-ieħor jonqos milli jħares l-obbligi tiegħu għall-protezzjoni tad-data, il-proċessur inizjali għandu jibqa' kompletament responsabbli quddiem il-kontrollur għat-twettiq tal-obbligi ta' dak il-proċessur l-ieħor.
|
|
Artikolu 28 5.
|
Il-konformità minn proċessur ma' kodiċi ta' kondotta approvat kif imsemmi fl- Artikolu 40 jew mekkaniżmu ta' ċertifikazzjoni approvat kif imsemmi fl- Artikolu 42 jistgħu jintużaw bħala element li bih jintwerew il-garanziji suffiċjenti kif imsemmija fil-paragrafi 1 u 4 ta'dan l-Artikolu.
|
|
Artikolu 28 6.
|
Mingħajr preġudizzju għal kuntratt individwali bejn il-kontrollur u l-proċessur, il-kuntratt jew l-att legali l-ieħor imsemmi fil-paragrafu 3 u 4 ta'dan l-Artikolu jistgħu jkunu bbażati, b'mod sħiħ jew parzjalment, fuq klawżoli kuntrattwali standard imsemmija fil-paragrafi 7 u 8 ta'dan l-Artikolu inkluż meta jagħmlu parti minn ċertifikazzjoni mogħtija lill-kontrollur jew lill-proċessur skont l-Artikoli 42 u 43.
|
|
Artikolu 28 7.
|
Il-Kummissjoni tista' tistabbilixxi klawżoli kuntrattwali standard għal kwistjonijiet imsemmijin fil-paragrafu 3 u 4 ta'dan l-Artikolu u f'konformità mal-proċedura ta' eżami msemmija fl-Artikolu 93(2).
|
|
Artikolu 28 8.
|
Awtorità superviżorja tista' tadotta klawżoli kuntrattwali standard għall-kwistjonijiet imsemmijin fil-paragrafu 3 u 4 ta'dan l-Artikolu u f'konformità mal-mekkaniżmu ta' konsistenza msemmi fl-Artikolu 63.
|
|
Artikolu 28 9.
|
Il-kuntratt jew l-att legali ieħor imsemmi fil-paragrafi 3 u 4 għandu jkun bil-miktub, inkluż f'forma elettronika.
|
|
Artikolu 28 10.
|
Mingħajr preġudizzju għall-Artikoli 82, 83 u 84, jekk proċessur jikser dan ir-Regolament billi jiddetermina l-għanijiet u l-mezzi tal-ipproċessar, il-proċessur għandu jitqies bħala kontrollur fir-rigward ta' dak l-ipproċessar.
|
,
1.1 Referenzi
1.2 Rekwiżiti identifikati
1.3 Standards relatati
2. Rekwiżiti identifikati
3. Standards relatati
Standards
| Sors |
Rekwiżit |
|
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.
|
|