+Artykuł 49 Wyjątki w szczególnych sytuacjach
---+Artykuł 49 1.
---+Artykuł 49 2.
---+Artykuł 49 3.
---+Artykuł 49 4.
---+Artykuł 49 5.
---+Artykuł 49 6.

Artykuł 49 Wyjątki w szczególnych sytuacjach

-

1. Przegląd

,
Tytuł Regulacja
Artykuł 49 1.

W razie braku decyzji stwierdzającej odpowiedni stopień ochrony określonej w art. 45 ust. 3 lub braku odpowiednich zabezpieczeń określonych w art. 46, w tym wiążących reguł korporacyjnych, jednorazowe lub wielokrotne przekazanie danych osobowych do państwa trzeciego lub organizacji międzynarodowej mogą nastąpić wyłącznie pod warunkiem, że:

a) 

osoba, której dane dotyczą, poinformowana o ewentualnym ryzyku, z którymi – ze względu na brak decyzji stwierdzającej odpowiedni stopień ochrony oraz na brak odpowiednich zabezpieczeń – może się dla niej wiązać proponowane przekazanie, wyraźnie wyraziła na nie zgodę;

b) 

przekazanie jest niezbędne do wykonania umowy między osobą, której dane dotyczą, a administratorem lub do wprowadzenia w życie środków przedumownych podejmowanych na żądanie osoby, której dane dotyczą;

c) 

przekazanie jest niezbędne do zawarcia lub wykonania umowy zawartej w interesie osoby, których dane dotyczą, między administratorem a inną osobą fizyczną lub prawną;

d) 

przekazanie jest niezbędne ze względu na ważne względy interesu publicznego;

e) 

przekazanie jest niezbędne do ustalenia, dochodzenia lub ochrony roszczeń;

f) 

przekazanie jest niezbędne do ochrony żywotnych interesów osoby, których dane dotyczą, lub innych osób, jeżeli osoba, której dane dotyczą, jest fizycznie lub prawnie niezdolna do wyrażenia zgody; lub

g) 

przekazanie następuje z rejestru, który zgodnie z prawem Unii lub prawem państwa członkowskiego ma służyć za źródło informacji dla ogółu obywateli i który jest dostępny dla ogółu obywateli lub dla każdej osoby mogącej wykazać prawnie uzasadniony interes – ale wyłącznie w zakresie, w jakim w danym przypadku spełnione zostały warunki takiego dostępu określone w prawie Unii lub w prawie państwa członkowskiego.

Jeżeli przekazanie nie może się opierać na art. 45 ani 46, w tym na przepisach dotyczących wiążących reguł korporacyjnych, i nie ma zastosowania żaden z wyjątków mających zastosowanie w szczególnych sytuacjach zgodnie z akapitem pierwszym niniejszego ustępu, przekazanie do państwa trzeciego lub organizacji międzynarodowej może nastąpić wyłącznie, gdy przekazanie nie jest powtarzalne, dotyczy tylko ograniczonej liczby osób, których dane dotyczą, jest niezbędne ze względu na ważne prawnie uzasadnione interesy realizowane przez administratora, wobec których charakteru nadrzędnego nie mają interesy ani prawa i wolności osoby, której dane dotyczą a administrator ocenił wszystkie okoliczności przekazania danych i na podstawie tej oceny zapewnił odpowiednie zabezpieczenia w zakresie ochrony danych osobowych. Administrator informuje organ nadzorczy o przekazaniu. Poza informacjami, o których mowa w art. 13 i 14, administrator podaje osobie, której dane dotyczą, także informacje o przekazaniu i o ważnych prawnie uzasadnionych interesach realizowanych przez niego.

Artykuł 49 2.
Przekazanie na mocy ust. 1 akapit pierwszy lit. g) nie obejmuje całości danych osobowych ani całych kategorii danych osobowych zawartych w rejestrze. Jeżeli rejestr jest dostępny dla osób mających prawnie uzasadniony interes, przekazanie następuje wyłącznie na żądanie tych osób lub gdy mają one być odbiorcami.
Artykuł 49 3.
Ust. 1 akapit pierwszy lit. a), b), c) oraz ust. 1 akapit drugi tego ustepu nie mają zastosowania do działalności prowadzonej przez organy publiczne w ramach wykonywania przysługujących im uprawnień publicznych.
Artykuł 49 4.
Interes publiczny, o którym mowa w ust. 1 akapit pierwszy lit. d), musi być uznany w prawie Unii lub w prawie państwa członkowskiego, któremu podlega administrator.
Artykuł 49 5.
W razie braku decyzji stwierdzającej odpowiedni stopień ochrony prawo Unii lub prawo państwa członkowskiego może z uwagi na ważne względy interesu publicznego wyraźnie nakładać ograniczenia na przekazywanie konkretnych kategorii danych osobowych do państwa trzeciego lub organizacji międzynarodowej. Państwa członkowskie powiadamiają Komisję o takich przepisach.
Artykuł 49 6.
Administrator lub podmiot przetwarzający dokumentują ocenę oraz odpowiednie zabezpieczenia, o których mowa w ust. 1 akapit drugi niniejszego artykułu, w rejestrach, o których mowa w art. 30.

1.1 Odwołania

1.2 Zidentyfikowane wymagania

1.3 Powiązane normy

2. Zidentyfikowane wymagania

Wymagania
Źródło Wymaganie

3. Powiązane normy

Normy
Źródło Wymaganie
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.