Germany/Saarland: Privacy inspection questionnaires

.. in German

The DPA Saarland uses four questionnaires:
– interesting questions incl. on various concepts (data deletion, encryption, pseudonymization, risk evaluation/model, privacy management, ..)

Key points from the Accountability questionnaire (GDPR Art 5 (2))

  • (Translation, highlights by myself)
    Accountability Review
    according to Art. 5 Para. 2 GDPR
    Posted December 04, 2018
    Case number:

    We kindly ask you to answer the following questions in full and send the requested documents based on Art. 58 GDPR by January 31, 2019 at the latest.

    Basic concept

    1. Is there a data protection guideline(/policy/directive) in the company?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of the guideline.
      • No.
    2. Has a data protection officer been appointed and reported to the supervisory authority?
      • Yes. ____________________________________
      • No.
    3. What are the tasks of your data protection officer in this function (short description)?
    4. Does the data protection officer perform other functions in or for the company?
      • Yes. Please describe them briefly.
      • No.
    5. If there are several locations or branches of the company, are these integrated into a uniform data protection concept?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of the data protection concept.
      • No.
    6. Do these locations or branches independently decide on the purposes and means for processing personal data?
      • Yes.
      • No.
    7. Are internal responsibilities with regard to data protection-relevant processes or procedures (e.g. training of employees, reporting of data protection violations, …)?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of the written specifications.
      • No.
    8. Are there rules for internal controls to ensure compliance with data protection regulations?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of these rules.
      • No.
    9. Please describe briefly how the company is dealing with inputs by the data protection officer (e.g. reports, statements or similar)

      List of processing activities (Art. 30 GDPR)

    10. Is there a complete list of processing activities?
      • Yes. Please state the number of processing activities.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    11. Please describe the method used (e.g. purpose, means, process, IT system, …) to determine the individual processing activities.
    12. Please describe the rules on how the directory of processing activities is managed (e.g. updates or with regard to change history and powers, etc.).

      Uniform risk model

    13. Is there a document that provides a company-wide understanding of data protection risk?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of this document.
      • No.
    14. Please describe how, in your opinion, the damage to the rights and freedoms of natural persons should be understood when evaluating data protection risk.
    15. Please describe which scales are used to model the likelihood of occurrence and severity of a data protection risk in the company.
    16. Please describe how you ensure that all relevant positions understand the difference between the corporate risk (focus: corporate values) and a data protection risk (focus: rights and freedoms of natural persons).
    17. Is the risk model known to those responsible for data protection as well as the company data protection officer and the information security officer?
      • Yes.
      • No.

      Privacy compliant data processing

    18. Is there a documented legal basis for the processing of personal data for every processing activity according to Art. 30 GDPR?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    19. Is there a documented legitimate interest assessment if processing is based on a “balancing of interests” according to GDPR Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    20. Are consents within the meaning of Art. 4 No. 11 GDPR designed in accordance with the requirements of Art. 7 GDPR and can they be withdrawn at any time?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    21. Describe the contexts in which the data subject’s consent is obtained.
    22. Send appropriate samples of the declarations of consent you are using.
    23. Has a threshold value analysis (i.e. risk assessment) been carried out for each processing documented in the directory according to Art. 30 GDPR to prepare the question of whether a data protection impact assessment has to be carried out?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    24. Please name the processing activities for which you have determined the need to carry out a data protection impact assessment in accordance with Art. 35 GDPR and provide us with the documented results of the data protection impact assessments.
    25. Is there a deletion concept (e.g. according to DIN 66398) that also regulates the handling of archives and backups?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of this concept.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    26. Are adequate measures in place to ensure confidentiality, integrity and availability according to GDPR Art 32?
      • Yes. Please send us the security concept.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    27. Is there a process (Plan-Do-Check-Act) to ensure the effectiveness of the measures under Art. 32 GDPR?
      • Yes. Please send us a description of this process.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    28. Please describe how Privacy by Design is conceptually implemented in accordance with Art. 25 Para. 1 GDPR, taking particular account of the principles of data minimization and compliance with the purpose limitation in the processing activities in the company.
    29. Does a uniform audit methodology apply to audits by the data protection officer?
      • Yes. Please send us copies of the last two audit reports.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    30. Please describe how it is ensured that processors are selected in accordance with Art. 28 GDPR on the basis of a suitable risk model and effective technical and organizational measures based on them (in accordance with Art. 25 Para. 1 GDPR).
    31. Please describe how it is ensured that (for sub-processing) the legal basis of the so-called second level for data transfers to third countries is correctly designed.
    32. Is there a uniform encryption concept?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of the written specifications.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    33. Does a uniform pseudonymization concept exist?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of the written specifications.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    34. Are there processing activities in the company for which there is a joint controllership pursuant to Article 26 GDPR?
      • If yes, please describe this processing in key words and submit the corresponding agreements on joint responsibility for two of these processing processes.
      • No.

      Dealing with data subject rights

    35. Has a process been implemented to deal with information claims under Art. 15 GDPR?
      • Yes. Please describe this process.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    36. Please describe how it is ensured that the personal data of those affected can be quickly and completely available from all existing systems and, if applicable, branches.
    37. Are data subjects transparently informed about all processing activities documented in the directory according to Art. 30 GDPR in accordance with Art. 12 ff. And, if applicable, Art. 21 GDPR?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    38. Has the website (s) been revised since May 25, 2018 in such a way that they are sufficiently informed about the data processing (the website) in accordance with Art. 13 GDPR?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.

      Please send us a complete list of all domain names for your company.

    39. Has a procedure been implemented to ensure compliance with the deadlines regarding the rights of the data subjects pursuant to Art. 14-22 GDPR?
      • Yes. Please describe this procedure.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    40. Has a procedure been implemented to respond to requests from data protection supervisory authorities regarding data protection complaints received there?
      • Yes. Please describe this procedure.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    41. Are training documents available with which the persons who are involved in the processes to ensure the rights of those affected are properly informed?
      • Yes. Please send us a copy of these documents.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    42. Have you considered how to respond to a data subject’s application for data portability in accordance with Art. 20 GDPR? If necessary, please describe your considerations.
    43. Have you already made such an application?
      • Yes.
      • No.

      Dealing with data protection violations

    44. How many data protection violations according to Art. 33 GDPR have you become aware of since May 25, 2018 and how many of them have been reported to the supervisory authority or only documented within the meaning of Art. 33 Para. 5 GDPR?
    45. Please describe how data protection violations are recognized in the company according to Art. 33/34 GDPR.
    46. ​​Please describe how you can identify, document and process data protection violations that occur with service providers (also in third countries).
    47. Does the risk model for classifying data protection risk also apply to data protection violations according to Article 33/34 GDPR?
      • Yes.
      • No. Please give the reason.
    48. Describe the process in the event that a high risk for data subjects is identified in the event of data protection violations.
    49. Describe to what extent it is guaranteed that data protection violations will be reported to the responsible supervisory authority within 72 hours (including on weekends / public holidays).
    50. Has it been clarified and documented at which positions in the company the registration period of 72 hours starts?
      • Yes. Please tell us these places: _______________________
      • No. Please give the reason.
  • DPA Liechtenstein – Verfahrensbeschreibung für Datenschutzüberprüfungen

    Process description for data protection inspections / privacy inspections / audits.

    In a first step, the DPA is gathering information and statements based on a questionnaire.

    In addition, the DPA regularly requests the following information in an electronic format or on paper:

    • Records of processing activities (GDPR Art. 30 (4));
    • Information to the affected persons (GDPR Art. 13 and 14);
    • Templates of consent forms (GDPR Art. 7);
    • Information about data protection trainings of employees;
    • Contracts with processors (GDPR Art. 28 (3)) or other current contracts with external parties that get in touch with personal data, such as hardware and software partners, software vendors, application service providers, in which the applicable data protection controls need to be emphasized;
    • Documentation of data breaches (GDPR Art. (5));
    • Data protection impact assessments (GDPR Art. (35)).

    In order to assess compliance to GDPR and the effectiveness of the controls, the DPA regularly asks for

    • Organisational structure
    • Privacy directive (privacy policy), security policy, emergency planning
    • Review and audit reports – esp. in context of IT in scope
    • Basic documentation of the IT infrastructure (hardware and software in use)
    • Access control concept, especially access rights of administrators, external staff, sub-processors and other external parties
    • Policies, instructions to users for the use of IT
    • Non-disclosure, confidentiality agreements and other relevant instructions/agreements
    • Controls and arrangements regarding the retention time and deletion of personal data (deletion concept)

    Netherlands, DPA: Cloud storage of patient data reviewed by Dutch DPA — and found GDPR compliant

    The Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) sees no reason to initiate a more detailed investigation into possible violations of the GDPR by MRDM when storing medical data on a cloud platform. This concerns personal data originating from Dutch hospitals. Public questions have been asked about how the organization works. The privacy regulator has obtained information on this from MRDM. – MDRM is a third party IT Services provider processing patient data for Dutch hospitals.

    MRDM in turn uses a sub-processor (apparently Google) for the storage of that personal data. This sub-processor is a cloud platform that is located outside the EU. The storage of data is done via the cloud. The ‘exploratory investigation’ of the AP related to that last step: the processing of patient data in the cloud.

    As part of an explorative inquiry the DPA lookes at the storage, by MRDM’s sub-processor, of patient data in the cloud.
    Apparently, the following have been reviewed

    • the standard operating procedures,
    • the sub-processing agreements and
    • technical and organizational security measures.

    The personal data is stored in the Netherlands, the contracts with the cloud platform ensure that there is no international transfer of personal data to third countries outside the EEA. In addition, MRDM has informed the AP about how the data is protected.

    The decision of the Dutch DPA not to investigate further might be seen as a sign that n that GDPR compliance can be achieved in respect of cloud-based processing of patient data.

    DPA press release:

    Blog post by BakerMcKenzie:

    Media article:

    Irish DPA – Guide to Audit Process

    v2.0 August 2014

    “This guidance was originally published in 2009. This revised version has been updated to take account of legislative developments and to reflect any changes in the approach of the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner to the audit process. The guidance is designed to assist organisations selected for audit by the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner. It is hoped that
    this resource will provide organisations holding personal data with a simple and clear basis to conduct a self-assessment of their compliance with their obligations under Irish Data Protection Law”