+Artikel 49 Afwijkingen voor specifieke situaties
---+Artikel 49 1.
---+Artikel 49 2.
---+Artikel 49 3.
---+Artikel 49 4.
---+Artikel 49 5.
---+Artikel 49 6.
|
Artikel 49 Afwijkingen voor specifieke situaties
-
1. Overzicht
| Titel |
Regelgeving |
|
Artikel 49 1.
|
Bij ontstentenis van een adequaatheidsbesluit overeenkomstig artikel 45, lid 3, of van passende waarborgen overeenkomstig artikel 46, met inbegrip van bindende bedrijfsvoorschriften, kan een doorgifte of een reeks van doorgiften van persoonsgegevens aan een derde land of een internationale organisatie slechts plaatsvinden mits aan één van de volgende voorwaarden is voldaan:
▼C2
a)
de betrokkene heeft uitdrukkelijk toestemming gegeven voor de voorgestelde doorgifte, na te zijn ingelicht over de risico’s die dergelijke doorgiften voor hem kunnen inhouden bij ontstentenis van een adequaatheidsbesluit en van passende waarborgen;
▼B
b)
de doorgifte is noodzakelijk voor de uitvoering van een overeenkomst tussen de betrokkene en de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke of voor de uitvoering van op verzoek van de betrokkene genomen precontractuele maatregelen;
c)
de doorgifte is noodzakelijk voor de sluiting of de uitvoering van een in het belang van de betrokkene tussen de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke en een andere natuurlijke persoon of rechtspersoon gesloten overeenkomst;
d)
de doorgifte is noodzakelijk wegens gewichtige redenen van algemeen belang;
e)
de doorgifte is noodzakelijk voor de instelling, uitoefening of onderbouwing van een rechtsvordering;
f)
de doorgifte is noodzakelijk voor de bescherming van de vitale belangen van de betrokkene of van andere personen, indien de betrokkene lichamelijk of juridisch niet in staat is zijn toestemming te geven;
▼C2
g)
de doorgifte is verricht vanuit een register dat volgens het Unierecht of lidstatelijk recht is bedoeld om het publiek voor te lichten en dat door het brede publiek dan wel door iedere persoon die zich op een gerechtvaardigd belang kan beroepen, kan worden geraadpleegd, maar alleen voor zover in het geval in kwestie wordt voldaan aan de in Unierecht of lidstatelijk recht vastgestelde voorwaarden voor raadpleging.
►C2
Wanneer een doorgifte niet op een bepaling van de artikelen 45 of 46, met inbegrip van de bepalingen inzake bindende bedrijfsvoorschriften, kan worden gegrond en geen van de afwijkingen voor een specifieke situatie als bedoeld in de eerste alinea van dit lid van toepassing zijn, mag de doorgifte aan een derde land of aan een internationale organisatie alleen plaatsvinden indien de doorgifte niet repetitief is, een beperkt aantal betrokkenen betreft, noodzakelijk is voor dwingende gerechtvaardigde belangen van de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke die niet ondergeschikt zijn aan de belangen of rechten en vrijheden van de betrokkene, en de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke alle omstandigheden in verband met de gegevensdoorgifte heeft beoordeeld en op basis van die beoordeling passende waarborgen voor de bescherming van persoonsgegevens heeft geboden. De verwerkingsverantwoordelijke informeert de toezichthoudende autoriteit over de doorgifte. ◄ De verwerkingsverantwoordelijke verstrekt de betrokkene naast de in de artikelen 13 en 14 bedoelde informatie, ook informatie met betrekking tot de doorgifte en de door hem nagestreefde dwingende gerechtvaardigde belangen.
|
|
Artikel 49 2.
|
Een doorgifte overeenkomstig lid 1, eerste alinea, onder g), mag geen betrekking hebben op alle persoonsgegevens of volledige categorieën van persoonsgegevens die in het register zijn opgeslagen. Wanneer een register bedoeld is om door personen met een gerechtvaardigd belang te worden geraadpleegd, kan de doorgifte slechts plaatsvinden op verzoek van die personen of wanneer de gegevens voor hen zijn bestemd.
|
|
Artikel 49 3.
|
Lid 1, eerste alinea, onder a), b) en c) en tweede alinea, zijn niet van toepassing op activiteiten die door overheidsinstanties worden verricht bij de uitoefening van hun openbare bevoegdheden.
|
|
Artikel 49 4.
|
Het in lid 1, eerste alinea, onder d), bedoelde algemeen belang moet zijn erkend bij een Unierechtelijke of nationaalrechtelijke bepaling die op de verwerkingsverantwoordelijke van toepassing is.
|
|
Artikel 49 5.
|
►C2
Bij ontstentenis van een adequaatheidsbesluit kunnen in Unierechtelijke of lidstaatrechtelijke bepalingen of bepalingen om gewichtige redenen van algemeen belang uitdrukkelijk grenzen worden gesteld aan de doorgifte van specifieke categorieën van persoonsgegevens aan een derde land of een internationale organisatie. ◄ De lidstaten stellen de Commissie in kennis van dergelijke bepalingen.
|
|
Artikel 49 6.
|
De verwerkingsverantwoordelijke of de verwerker staaft de beoordeling en de in lid 1, tweede alinea, van dit artikel bedoelde passende waarborgen in het artikel 30 bedoelde register.
|
,
1.1 Referenties
1.2 Geïdentificeerde eisen
1.3 Gerelateerde standaarden
2. Geïdentificeerde eisen
3. Gerelateerde standaarden
Standaarden
| Bron |
Eis |
|
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.
|
|