IAPP CIPP-E - Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E)
Pursuant to Article 17 and EDPB Guidelines S'2019 on RTBF criteria in search engines cases, all of the following would be valid grounds for data subject delisting requests EXCEPT?
A data controller appoints a data protection officer. Which of the following conditions would NOT result in an infringement of Articles 37 to 39 of the GDPR?
Start-up company MagicAl is developing an AI system that will be part of a medical device that detects skin cancer. To take measures against potential bias in its AI system, the IT team decides to collect data about users’ ethnic origin, nationality, and gender.
Which would be the most appropriate legal basis for this processing under GDPR, Article 9 (Processing of special categories of personal data)?
A homeowner has installed a motion-detecting surveillance system that films his front doc and entryway. The camera does not film any public areas only areas that are the property of the homeowner. The system has seen declared to the authorities per the homeowner's country law, and a placard indicating the area is being video monitored is visible when entering the property
Why can the homeowner NOT depend on the household exemption with regards to the processing of the video images recorded by the surveillance camera system?
Pursuant to the EDPB Guidelines 8/2022, all of the following criteria must be considered when identifying a lead supervisory authority of a controller EXCEPT?
Which of the following would NOT be relevant when determining if a processing activity would be considered profiling?
MagicClean is a web-based service located in the United States that matches home cleaning services to customers. It otters its services exclusively in the United States It uses a processor located in France to optimize its data. Is MagicClean subject to the GDPR?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Liem, an online retailer known for its environmentally friendly shoes, has recently expanded its presence in Europe. Anxious to achieve market dominance, Liem teamed up with another eco friendly company, EcoMick, which sells accessories like belts and bags. Together the companies drew up a series of marketing campaigns designed to highlight the environmental and economic benefits of their products. After months of planning, Liem and EcoMick entered into a data sharing agreement to use the same marketing database, MarketIQ, to send the campaigns to their respective contacts.
Liem and EcoMick also entered into a data processing agreement with MarketIQ, the terms of which included processing personal data only upon Liem and EcoMick’s instructions, and making available to them all information necessary to demonstrate compliance with GDPR obligations.
Liem and EcoMick then procured the services of a company called JaphSoft, a marketing optimization firm that uses machine learning to help companies run successful campaigns. Clients provide JaphSoft with the personal data of individuals they would like to be targeted in each campaign. To ensure protection of its
clients’ data, JaphSoft implements the technical and organizational measures it deems appropriate. JaphSoft works to continually improve its machine learning models by analyzing the data it receives from its clients to determine the most successful components of a successful campaign. JaphSoft then uses such models in providing services to its client-base. Since the models improve only over a period of time as more information is collected, JaphSoft does not have a deletion process for the data it receives from clients. However, to ensure compliance with data privacy rules, JaphSoft pseudonymizes the personal data by removing identifying
information from the contact information. JaphSoft’s engineers, however, maintain all contact information in the same database as the identifying information.
Under its agreement with Liem and EcoMick, JaphSoft received access to MarketIQ, which included contact information as well as prior purchase history for such contacts, to create campaigns that would result in the most views of the two companies’ websites. A prior Liem customer, Ms. Iman, received a marketing campaign from JaphSoft regarding Liem’s as well as EcoMick’s latest products. While Ms. Iman recalls checking a box to receive information in the future regarding Liem’s products, she has never shopped EcoMick, nor provided her personal data to that company.
JaphSoft’s use of pseudonymization is NOT in compliance with the CDPR because?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Jack worked as a Pharmacovigiliance Operations Specialist in the Irish office of a multinational pharmaceutical company on a clinical trial related to COVID-19. As part of his onboarding process Jack received privacy training He was explicitly informed that while he would need to process confidential patient data in the course of his work, he may under no circumstances use this data for anything other than the performance of work-related (asks This was also specified in the privacy policy, which Jack signed upon conclusion of the training.
After several months of employment, Jack got into an argument with a patient over the phone. Out of anger he later posted the patient's name and hearth information, along with disparaging comments, on a social media website. When this was discovered by his Pharmacovigilance supervisors. Jack was immediately dismissed
Jack's lawyer sent a letter to the company stating that dismissal was a disproportionate sanction, and that if Jack was not reinstated within 14 days his firm would have no alternative but to commence legal proceedings against the company. This letter was accompanied by a data access request from Jack requesting a copy of "all personal data, including internal emails that were sent/received by Jack or where Jack is directly or indirectly identifiable from the contents In relation to the emails Jack listed six members of the management team whose inboxes he required access.
The company conducted an initial search of its IT systems, which returned a large amount of information They then contacted Jack, requesting that he be more specific regarding what information he required, so that they could carry out a targeted search Jack responded by stating that he would not narrow the scope of the information requester.
Under Article 82 of the GDPR ("Right to compensation and liability-), which party is liable for the damage caused by the data breach?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Due to rapidly expanding workforce, Company A has decided to outsource its payroll function to Company B. Company B is an established payroll service provider with a sizable client base and a solid reputation in the industry.
Company B’s payroll solution for Company A relies on the collection of time and attendance data obtained via a biometric entry system installed in each of Company A’s factories. Company B won’t hold any biometric data itself, but the related data will be uploaded to Company B’s UK servers and used to provide the payroll service. Company B’s live systems will contain the following information for each of Company A’s employees:
Name
Address
Date of Birth
Payroll number
National Insurance number
Sick pay entitlement
Maternity/paternity pay entitlement
Holiday entitlement
Pension and benefits contributions
Trade union contributions
Jenny is the compliance officer at Company A. She first considers whether Company A needs to carry out a data protection impact assessment in relation to the new time and attendance system, but isn’t sure whether or not this is required.
Jenny does know, however, that under the GDPR there must be a formal written agreement requiring Company B to use the time and attendance data only for the purpose of providing the payroll service, and to apply appropriate technical and organizational security measures for safeguarding the data. Jenny suggests that Company B obtain advice from its data protection officer. The company doesn’t have a DPO but agrees, in the interest of finalizing the contract, to sign up for the provisions in full. Company A enters into the contract.
Weeks later, while still under contract with Company A, Company B embarks upon a separate project meant to enhance the functionality of its payroll service, and engages Company C to help. Company C agrees to extract all personal data from Company B’s live systems in order to create a new database for Company B.
This database will be stored in a test environment hosted on Company C’s U.S. server. The two companies agree not to include any data processing provisions in their services agreement, as data is only being used for IT testing purposes.
Unfortunately, Company C’s U.S. server is only protected by an outdated IT security system, and suffers a cyber security incident soon after Company C begins work on the project. As a result, data relating to Company A’s employees is visible to anyone visiting Company C’s website. Company A is unaware of this until Jenny receives a letter from the supervisory authority in connection with the investigation that ensues. As soon as Jenny is made aware of the breach, she notifies all affected employees.
The GDPR requires sufficient guarantees of a company’s ability to implement adequate technical and organizational measures. What would be the most realistic way that Company B could have fulfilled this requirement?
