+Artigo 28.o Subcontratante
---+Artigo 28.o 1.
---+Artigo 28.o 2.
---+Artigo 28.o 3.
---+Artigo 28.o 4.
---+Artigo 28.o 5.
---+Artigo 28.o 6.
---+Artigo 28.o 7.
---+Artigo 28.o 8.
---+Artigo 28.o 9.
---+Artigo 28.o 10.
|
Artigo 28.o Subcontratante
-
1. Visão geral
| Título |
Regulamentação |
|
Artigo 28.o 1.
|
Quando o tratamento dos dados for efetuado por sua conta, o responsável pelo tratamento recorre apenas a subcontratantes que apresentem garantias suficientes de execução de medidas técnicas e organizativas adequadas de uma forma que o tratamento satisfaça os requisitos do presente regulamento e assegure a defesa dos direitos do titular dos dados.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 2.
|
O subcontratante não contrata outro subcontratante sem que o responsável pelo tratamento tenha dado, previamente e por escrito, autorização específica ou geral. Em caso de autorização geral por escrito, o subcontratante informa o responsável pelo tratamento de quaisquer alterações pretendidas quanto ao aumento do número ou à substituição de outros subcontratantes, dando assim ao responsável pelo tratamento a oportunidade de se opor a tais alterações.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 3.
|
O tratamento em subcontratação é regulado por contrato ou outro ato normativo ao abrigo do direito da União ou dos Estados-Membros, que vincule o subcontratante ao responsável pelo tratamento, estabeleça o objeto e a duração do tratamento, a natureza e finalidade do tratamento, o tipo de dados pessoais e as categorias dos titulares dos dados, e as obrigações e direitos do responsável pelo tratamento. Esse contrato ou outro ato normativo estipulam, designadamente, que o subcontratante:
a)
Trata os dados pessoais apenas mediante instruções documentadas do responsável pelo tratamento, incluindo no que respeita às transferências de dados para países terceiros ou organizações internacionais, a menos que seja obrigado a fazê-lo pelo direito da União ou do Estado-Membro a que está sujeito, informando nesse caso o responsável pelo tratamento desse requisito jurídico antes do tratamento, salvo se a lei proibir tal informação por motivos importantes de interesse público;
b)
Assegura que as pessoas autorizadas a tratar os dados pessoais assumiram um compromisso de confidencialidade ou estão sujeitas a adequadas obrigações legais de confidencialidade;
c)
Adota todas as medidas exigidas nos termos do artigo 32.o;
d)
Respeita as condições a que se referem os n.os 2 e 4 para contratar outro subcontratante;
e)
Toma em conta a natureza do tratamento, e na medida do possível, presta assistência ao responsável pelo tratamento através de medidas técnicas e organizativas adequadas, para permitir que este cumpra a sua obrigação de dar resposta aos pedidos dos titulares dos dados tendo em vista o exercício dos seus direitos previstos no capítulo III;
f)
Presta assistência ao responsável pelo tratamento no sentido de assegurar o cumprimento das obrigações previstas nos artigos 32.o a 36.o, tendo em conta a natureza do tratamento e a informação ao dispor do subcontratante;
g)
Consoante a escolha do responsável pelo tratamento, apaga ou devolve-lhe todos os dados pessoais depois de concluída a prestação de serviços relacionados com o tratamento, apagando as cópias existentes, a menos que a conservação dos dados seja exigida ao abrigo do direito da União ou dos Estados-Membros; e
h)
Disponibiliza ao responsável pelo tratamento todas as informações necessárias para demonstrar o cumprimento das obrigações previstas no presente artigo e facilita e contribui para as auditorias, inclusive as inspeções, conduzidas pelo responsável pelo tratamento ou por outro auditor por este mandatado.
No que diz respeito ao primeiro parágrafo, alínea h), o subcontratante informa imediatamente o responsável pelo tratamento se, no seu entender, alguma instrução violar o presente regulamento ou outras disposições do direito da União ou dos Estados-Membros em matéria de proteção de dados.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 4.
|
Se o subcontratante contratar outro subcontratante para a realização de operações específicas de tratamento de dados por conta do responsável pelo tratamento, são impostas a esse outro subcontratante, por contrato ou outro ato normativo ao abrigo do direito da União ou dos Estados-Membros, as mesmas obrigações em matéria de proteção de dados que as estabelecidas no contrato ou outro ato normativo entre o responsável pelo tratamento e o subcontratante, referidas no n.o 3, em particular a obrigação de apresentar garantias suficientes de execução de medidas técnicas e organizativas adequadas de uma forma que o tratamento seja conforme com os requisitos do presente regulamento. Se esse outro subcontratante não cumprir as suas obrigações em matéria de proteção de dados, o subcontratante inicial continua a ser plenamente responsável, perante o responsável pelo tratamento, pelo cumprimento das obrigações desse outro subcontratante.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 5.
|
O facto de o subcontratante cumprir um código de conduta aprovado conforme referido no artigo 40.o ou um procedimento de certificação aprovado conforme referido no artigo 42.o pode ser utilizado como elemento para demonstrar as garantias suficientes a que se referem os n.os 1 e 4 do presente artigo.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 6.
|
Sem prejuízo de um eventual contrato individual entre o responsável pelo tratamento e o subcontratante, o contrato ou outro ato normativo referidos nos n.os 3 e 4 do presente artigo podem ser baseados, totalmente ou em parte, nas cláusulas contratuais-tipo referidas nos n.os 7 e 8 do presente artigo, inclusivamente quando fazem parte de uma certificação concedida ao responsável pelo tratamento ou ao subcontratante por força dos artigos 42.o e 43.o.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 7.
|
A Comissão pode estabelecer cláusulas contratuais-tipo para as matérias referidas nos n.os 3 e 4 do presente artigo pelo procedimento de exame a que se refere o artigo 93.o, n.o 2.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 8.
|
A autoridade de controlo pode estabelecer cláusulas contratuais-tipo para as matérias referidas nos n.os 3 e 4 do presente artigo e de acordo com o procedimento de controlo da coerência referido no artigo 63.o.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 9.
|
O contrato ou outro ato normativo a que se referem os n.os 3 e 4 devem ser feitos por escrito, incluindo em formato eletrónico.
|
|
Artigo 28.o 10.
|
Sem prejuízo do disposto nos artigos 82.o, 83.o e 84.o, o subcontratante que, em violação do presente regulamento, determinar as finalidades e os meios de tratamento, é considerado responsável pelo tratamento no que respeita ao tratamento em questão.
|
,
1.1 Referências
1.2 Requisitos identificados
1.3 Normas relacionadas
2. Requisitos identificados
Requisitos
| Fonte |
Requisito |
3. Normas relacionadas
Normas
| Fonte |
Requisito |
|
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.
|
|