Customer data export and transfer

Use only processors providing sufficient guarantees to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures such that the processing meets the Regulation's requirements and protects the rights of the data subject. A processor must not engage another processor without the controller's prior specific or general written authorisation, and under a general authorisation must inform the controller of intended additions or replacements so the controller can object. The processing must be governed by a written contract or other legal act binding the processor to the controller, setting out the subject matter and duration, the nature and purpose, the type of personal data, the categories of data subjects and the controller's obligations and rights, and stipulating that the processor processes only on documented controller instructions including as to transfers, ensures persons authorised to process are under a duty of confidentiality, takes all Article 32 measures, respects the sub-processor conditions, assists the controller in responding to data subject rights requests, assists with Articles 32 to 36, deletes or returns all personal data at the controller's choice at the end of the service and deletes existing copies unless law requires retention, and makes available all information needed to demonstrate compliance and allows for and contributes to audits and inspections. The processor must immediately inform the controller if it considers an instruction infringes data protection law. The same obligations must be imposed on any sub-processor, and the initial processor remains fully liable for the sub-processor's performance. A processor that determines purposes and means is a controller for that processing.

What an assessor asks to see: A processor inventory reconciled against the vendor register or accounts payable, so no processor is missing from it; The Article 28(3) contract for each processor, checked clause by clause against the eight stipulations the Article names; Due diligence evidence gathered before appointment showing sufficient guarantees, distinct from the signed contract; The sub-processor authorisation position for each processor, the current sub-processor list, and evidence changes were notified. Where it usually falls short: The processor's own standard terms accepted, which commonly omit the audit right, the deletion choice and the instruction infringement notice

Maintain a written, including electronic, record of processing activities under the controller's responsibility containing the name and contact details of the controller, any joint controller, the representative and the data protection officer, the purposes of the processing, a description of the categories of data subjects and of personal data, the categories of recipients including those in third countries and international organisations, any transfers to a third country or international organisation with that destination identified and, for transfers under the second subparagraph of Article 49(1), the documentation of suitable safeguards, the envisaged time limits for erasure of each category where possible, and a general description of the Article 32(1) technical and organisational security measures where possible. A processor must maintain an equivalent record of the categories of processing carried out on behalf of each controller. Make the record available to the supervisory authority on request. The obligation does not apply to an organisation employing fewer than 250 persons unless the processing is likely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, is not occasional, or includes special category or criminal offence data.

What an assessor asks to see: The record of processing activities in full, checked against the seven controller elements, or the four processor elements, the Article lists; Version history showing when each entry was last reviewed and by whom; Reconciliation of the record against a system inventory or data flow map, to show nothing is missing rather than that the entries read well; The transfer entries with the third country identified and the safeguard documentation referenced. Where it usually falls short: Records written once during the implementation project and never updated against reality, so they describe systems long replaced and omit those adopted since

Implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk, taking into account the state of the art, the costs of implementation, the nature, scope, context and purposes of processing, and the risk of varying likelihood and severity for the rights and freedoms of natural persons. Those measures include, as appropriate, the pseudonymisation and encryption of personal data, the ability to ensure the ongoing confidentiality, integrity, availability and resilience of processing systems and services, the ability to restore the availability of and access to personal data in a timely manner after a physical or technical incident, and a process for regularly testing, assessing and evaluating the effectiveness of the technical and organisational measures. Assess the appropriate level of security against the risks presented by the processing, in particular accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of or access to personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed. Take steps to ensure that any person acting under the controller's or processor's authority who has access to personal data processes it only on instructions.

What an assessor asks to see: The security risk assessment per processing activity, expressed as risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals rather than only as risk to the organisation; Encryption and pseudonymisation coverage at rest, in transit and in backup, with the decision recorded where either was judged not appropriate; Restoration testing results showing personal data was actually recovered inside the intended timeframe, with the date and outcome; The regular testing programme Article 32(1)(d) requires: penetration tests, vulnerability scanning and control effectiveness reviews, with findings closed out. Where it usually falls short: Risk assessed as impact to the business, so processing that is low risk to the organisation and high risk to individuals attracts weak measures