+Artikolu 45 Trasferimenti abbażi ta' deċiżjoni ta' adegwatezza
---+Artikolu 45 1.
---+Artikolu 45 2.
---+Artikolu 45 3.
---+Artikolu 45 4.
---+Artikolu 45 5.
---+Artikolu 45 6.
---+Artikolu 45 7.
---+Artikolu 45 8.
---+Artikolu 45 9.
|
Artikolu 45 Trasferimenti abbażi ta' deċiżjoni ta' adegwatezza
-
1. Ħarsa ġenerali
| Titlu |
Regolamentazzjoni |
|
Artikolu 45 1.
|
Trasferiment ta' data personali lejn pajjiż terz jew organizzazzjoni internazzjonali jista' jseħħ fejn il-Kummissjoni tiddeċiedi li l-pajjiż terz, jew territorju jew settur speċifikat wieħed jew aktar f'dak il-pajjiż terz, jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali inkwistjoni tiżgura livell adegwat ta' protezzjoni. Tali trasferiment ma għandu jkun jeħtieġ ebda awtorizzazzjoni speċifika.
|
|
Artikolu 45 2.
|
Meta tivvaluta l-adegwatezza tal-livell ta' protezzjoni, il-Kummissjoni għandha tieħu kont, b'mod partikolari, tal-elementi li ġejjin:
(a)
l-istat tad-dritt, ir-rispett lejn id-drittijiet tal-bniedem u d-drittijiet fundamentali, il-leġiżlazzjoni rilevanti, kemm ġenerali kif ukoll settorjali, inkluż dwar is-sigurtà pubblika, id-difiża, is-sigurtà nazzjonali u l-liġi kriminali u l-aċċess tal-awtoritajiet pubbliċi għad-data personali, kif ukoll l-implimentazzjoni ta' tali leġiżlazzjoni, ir-regoli tal-protezzjoni tad-data, ir-regoli professjonali u l-miżuri ta' sigurtà, inklużi regoli għat-trasferiment ulterjuri ta' data personali lejn pajjiż terz ieħor jew organizzazzjoni internazzjonali oħra li jkun hemm konformità magħhom f'dak il-pajjiż jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali, preċedenti ta' ġurisprudenza, kif ukoll drittijiet tas-suġġett tad-data effettivi u infurzabbli u rimedju amministrattiv u ġudizzjarju effettiv għas-suġġetti tad-data li tkun qed tiġi ttrasferita d-data personali tagħhom;
(b)
l-eżistenza u l-funzjonament effettiv ta' awtorità superviżorja indipendenti waħda jew aktar fil-pajjiż terz jew li għalihom tkun soġġetta organizzazzjoni internazzjonali, bir-responsabbiltà għall-iżgurar u l-infurzar tal-konformità mar-regoli dwar il-protezzjoni tad-data, inklużi setgħat ta' nfurzar adegwati għall-assistenza u l-għoti ta' pariri lis-suġġetti tad-data fl-eżerċizzju tad-drittijiet tagħhom u għall-kooperazzjoni mal-awtoritajiet superviżorji tal-Istati Membri; u
(c)
l-impenji internazzjonali li l-pajjiż terz jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali kkonċernata tkun daħlet għalihom, jew obbligi oħrajn li jirriżultaw minn konvenzjonijiet jew strumenti legalment vinkolanti kif ukoll mis-sehem tagħha f'sistemi multilaterali jew reġjonali, b'mod partikolari b'rabta mal-protezzjoni ta' data personali.
|
|
Artikolu 45 3.
|
Il-Kummissjoni, wara li tivvaluta l-adegwatezza tal-livell ta' protezzjoni, tista' tiddeċiedi, permezz ta' att ta' implimentazzjoni, li pajjiż terz, jew territorju jew settur speċifikat wieħed jew aktar f'pajjiż terz, jew organizzazzjoni internazzjonali jiżguraw livell adegwat ta' protezzjoni fis-sens tal-paragrafu 2 ta' dan l-Artikolu. L-att ta' implimentazzjoni għandu jipprevedi mekkaniżmu għal rieżami perjodiku, mill-inqas kull erba' snin, li għandu jieħu kont tal-iżviluppi rilevanti kollha fil-pajjiż terz jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali. L-att ta' implimentazzjoni għandu jispeċifika l-applikazzjoni territorjali u settorjali tiegħu u, fejn applikabbli, jidentifika l-awtorità jew l-awtoritajiet superviżorji msemmija fil-punt (b) tal-paragrafu 2 ta' dan l-Artikolu. L-att ta' implimentazzjoni għandu jiġi adottat f'konformità mal-proċedura ta' eżami msemmija fl-Artikolu 93(2).
|
|
Artikolu 45 4.
|
Il-Kummissjoni għandha timmonitorja fuq bażi kontinwa l-iżviluppi f'pajjiżi terzi u organizzazzjonijiet internazzjonali li jistgħu jaffettwaw il-funzjonament tad-deċiżjonijiet adottati skont il-paragrafu 3 ta' dan l-Artikolu u d-deċiżjonijiet adottati abbażi tal-Artikolu 25(6) tad-Direttiva 95/46/KE.
|
|
Artikolu 45 5.
|
Il-Kummissjoni għandha tiddeċiedi, fejn l-informazzjoni disponibbli tiżvela dan, b'mod partikolari wara r-rieżami msemmi fil-paragrafu 3 ta' dan l-Artikolu, li pajjiż terz, jew territorju jew settur speċifikat f'pajjiż terz, jew organizzazzjoni internazzjonali ma għadux jew ma għadhiex tiżgura livell adegwat ta' protezzjoni fis-sens tal-paragrafu 2 ta' dan l-Artikolu, sa fejn ikun meħtieġ, għandha tħassar, temenda jew tissospendi d-deċiżjoni msemmija fil-paragrafu 3 ta' dan l-Artikolu, permezz ta' atti ta' implimentazzjoni mingħajr effett retroattiv. Dawk l-atti ta' implimentazzjoni għandhom jiġu adottati f'konformità mal-proċedura ta' eżami msemmija fl-Artikolu 93(2). F'każijiet imperattivi u debitament ġustifikati ta' urġenza, il-Kummissjoni għandha tadotta atti ta' implimentazzjoni li jkunu immedjatament applikabbli f'konformità mal-proċedura msemmija fl-Artikolu 93(3).
|
|
Artikolu 45 6.
|
Il-Kummissjoni għandha tidħol f'konsultazzjonijiet mal-pajjiż terz jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali bil-ħsieb li tirrimedja s-sitwazzjoni li twassal għad-deċiżjoni meħuda skont il-paragrafu 5.
|
|
Artikolu 45 7.
|
Deċiżjoni skont il-paragrafu 5 ta' dan l-Artikolu hija mingħajr preġudizzju għal trasferimenti ta' data personali lejn pajjiż terz, jew territorju jew settur wieħed jew aktar speċifikati f'dak il-pajjiż terz, jew l-organizzazzjoni internazzjonali inkwistjoni skont l-Artikoli 46 sa 49.
|
|
Artikolu 45 8.
|
Il-Kummissjoni għandha tippubblika f'Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea u fis-sit web tagħha lista tal-pajjiżi terzi, it-territorji u s-setturi speċifikati f'pajjiż terz u organizzazzjonijiet internazzjonali li għalihom tkun iddeċidiet li huwa jew li ma għadux żgurat livell adegwat ta' protezzjoni.
|
|
Artikolu 45 9.
|
Id-deċiżjonijiet adottati mill-Kummissjoni abbażi tal-Artikolu 25(6) tad-Direttiva 95/46/KE għandhom jibqgħu fis-seħħ sakemm jiġu emendati, sostitwiti jew imħassra minn Deċiżjoni tal-Kummissjoni adottata f'konformità mal-paragrafu 3 jew 5 ta' dan l-Artikolu.
|
,
1.1 Referenzi
1.2 Rekwiżiti identifikati
1.3 Standards relatati
2. Rekwiżiti identifikati
3. Standards relatati
Standards
| Sors |
Rekwiżit |
|
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.
|
|
SCF
|
Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement and manage Binding Corporate Rules (BCR) (e.g., data sharing agreement) to legally-bind all parties engaged in a joint economic activity that contractually states enforceable rights on data subjects with regard to the processing of their personal data.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Data privacy program
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Data privacy program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Data privacy program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Data privacy program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Data privacy 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
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 implement and manage Binding Corporate Rules (BCR) (e.g., data sharing agreement) to legally-bind all parties engaged in a joint economic activity that contractually states enforceable rights on data subjects with regard to the processing of their personal data.
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
|
Binding Corporate Rules (BCR)
Description
Mechanisms exist to implement and manage Binding Corporate Rules (BCR) (e.g., data sharing agreement) to legally-bind all parties engaged in a joint economic activity that contractually states enforceable rights on data subjects with regard to the processing of their personal data.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Data privacy program
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Data privacy program
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Data privacy program
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Data privacy program
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Data privacy 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
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 implement and manage Binding Corporate Rules (BCR) (e.g., data sharing agreement) to legally-bind all parties engaged in a joint economic activity that contractually states enforceable rights on data subjects with regard to the processing of their personal data.
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.
|
|