+Artikel 49 Undantag i särskilda situationer
---+Artikel 49 1.
---+Artikel 49 2.
---+Artikel 49 3.
---+Artikel 49 4.
---+Artikel 49 5.
---+Artikel 49 6.

Artikel 49 Undantag i särskilda situationer

-

1. Översikt

,
Artikel 49 1.

Om det inte föreligger något beslut om adekvat skyddsnivå enligt artikel 45.3, eller om lämpliga skyddsåtgärder enligt artikel 46, inbegripet bindande företagsbestämmelser, får en överföring eller uppsättning av överföringar av personuppgifter till ett tredjeland eller en internationell organisation endast ske om något av följande villkor är uppfyllt:

a) 

Den registrerade har uttryckligen samtyckt till att uppgifterna får överföras, efter att först ha blivit informerad om de eventuella riskerna med sådana överföringar för den registrerade när det inte föreligger något beslut om adekvat skyddsnivå eller lämpliga skyddsåtgärder.

b) 

Överföringen är nödvändig för att fullgöra ett avtal mellan den registrerade och den personuppgiftsansvarige eller för att genomföra åtgärder som föregår ett sådant avtal på den registrerades begäran.

c) 

Överföringen är nödvändig för att ingå eller fullgöra ett avtal mellan den personuppgiftsansvarige och en annan fysisk eller juridisk person i den registrerades intresse.

d) 

Överföringen är nödvändig av viktiga skäl som rör allmänintresset.

e) 

Överföringen är nödvändig för att kunna fastställa, göra gällande eller försvara rättsliga anspråk.

f) 

Överföringen är nödvändig för att skydda den registrerades eller andra personers grundläggande intressen, när den registrerade är fysiskt eller rättsligt förhindrad att ge sitt samtycke.

g) 

Överföringen görs från ett register som enligt unionsrätten eller medlemsstaternas nationella rätt är avsett att ge allmänheten information och som är tillgängligt antingen för allmänheten eller för var och en som kan styrka ett berättigat intresse, men endast i den utsträckning som de i unionsrätten eller i medlemsstaternas nationella rätt angivna villkoren för tillgänglighet uppfylls i det enskilda fallet.

När en överföring inte skulle kunna grundas på en bestämmelse i artikel 45 eller 46, inklusive bestämmelserna om bindande företagsbestämmelser, och inget av undantagen för en särskild situation som avses i första stycket i den här punkten är tillämpligt, får en överföring till ett tredjeland eller en internationell organisation ►C1  äga rum endast om överföringen inte är repetitiv, ◄ endast gäller ett begränsat antal registrerade, är nödvändig för ändamål som rör den personuppgiftsansvariges tvingande berättigade intressen och den registrerades intressen eller rättigheter och friheter inte väger tyngre, och den personuppgiftsansvarige har bedömt samtliga omständigheter kring överföringen av uppgifter och på grundval av denna bedömning vidtagit lämpliga skyddsåtgärder för att skydda personuppgifter. Den personuppgiftsansvarige ska informera tillsynsmyndigheten om överföringen. Den personuppgiftsansvarige ska utöver tillhandahållande av den information som avses i artiklarna 13 och 14 informera den registrerade om överföringen och om de tvingande berättigade intressen som eftersträvas.
Artikel 49 2.
En överföring enligt led g i punkt 1 första stycket får inte omfatta alla personuppgifter eller hela kategorier av personuppgifter som finns i registret. Om registret är avsett att vara tillgängligt för personer med ett berättigat intresse ska överföringen göras endast på begäran av dessa personer eller om de själva är mottagarna.
Artikel 49 3.
Leden a, b och c i punkt 1 första stycket samt andra stycket i samma punkt ska inte gälla åtgärder som vidtas av offentliga myndigheter som ett led i utövandet av deras offentliga befogenheter.
Artikel 49 4.
Det allmänintresse som avses i led d i punkt 1 första stycket ska vara erkänt i unionsrätten eller i den nationella rätt som den personuppgiftsansvarige omfattas av.
Artikel 49 5.
Saknas beslut om adekvat skyddsnivå, får unionsrätten eller medlemsstaternas nationella rätt med hänsyn till viktiga allmänintressen uttryckligen fastställa gränser för överföringen av specifika kategorier av personuppgifter till ett tredjeland eller en internationell organisation. Medlemsstaterna ska underrätta kommissionen om sådana bestämmelser.
Artikel 49 6.
Den personuppgiftsansvarige eller personuppgiftsbiträdet ska bevara uppgifter både om bedömningen och om de lämpliga skyddsåtgärder som avses i punkt 1 andra stycket i den här artikeln i det register som avses i artikel 30.

1.1 Referenser

1.2 Identifierade krav

1.3 Relaterade standarder

2. Identifierade krav

Krav

3. Relaterade standarder

Standarder
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.