According to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) No 2018/1725, the controller and the processor need to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure an appropriate level of security in relation to the risks represented by the processing and the nature of the personal data to be protected.
An example of such measure, provided in article 33, could be the pseudonymisation and encryption of data, where appropriate.
Safe Harbor Principles are a set of privacy and data protection principles that, together with a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) providing guidance for the implementation of the principles, have been considered by the European Commission to provide an adequate level of protection.
These principles were issued by the Government of the United States on 21 July 2000.
US organisations can claim that they comply with this framework. They should publicly disclose their privacy policies and be subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) - under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce - or to the jurisdiction of another statutory body that will ensure compliance with the principles implemented in accordance with the FAQs.
See also: Adequacy decision
Special categories of personal data include data that reveals "racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade-union membership, genetic data, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health or data concerning a natural's sex life or sexual orientation" (Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725; Article 9 of the GDPR)
The processing of such information is in principle prohibited, except in specific circumstances. It is possible to process sensitive data for instance if the processing is necessary for the purpose of medical diagnosis, or with specific safeguards in the field of employment law, or with explicit consent of the data subject.
The Schengen Information System (SIS) is a large-scale IT system linked to the abolition of internal border controls of the Schengen territory (most of the EU territory plus a few other countries).
The SIS will be replaced by SIS II in order to allow the connection of more countries and to provide new functionalities (see EDPS Opinion on the establishment of SIS II (pdf).
The SIS contains information on objects (stolen cars, identity documents, etc.), as well as on persons. Personal information may be recorded in the SIS on:
The data protection supervision of the system is ensured at national level by data protection authorities and, at European level, by the Schengen Joint Supervisory Authority or “JSA”.
The EDPS will replace the JSA at European level when the SIS II comes into operation, probably in the course of 2009.
Should you wish to access or rectify your data in the SIS, it is advisable to contact a data protection authority in one of the Schengen countries. Details of the relevant data protection authorities - who can either give you access themselves or tell you where to apply - are available on the JSA website.
Standard contractual clauses are legal tools to provide adequate safeguards for data transfers from the EU or the European Economic Area to third countries.
The European Commission has adopted three Decisions declaring Standard Contractual Clauses to be adequate, and therefore, companies can incorporate the clauses into a transfer contract.
In principle no authorisation is required from data protection authorities to be allowed to use these clauses. A formal notification to the authority might nevertheless be necessary.
SWIFT ("Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication") is a worldwide financial messaging service which facilitates international money transfers.
Following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the United States Department of the Treasury served administrative subpoenas requiring SWIFT to transfer personal data held on its United States server in order to identify, track and pursue those who provide financial support for terrorist activity.
After press reports revealed this transfer of personal data, involving also banking data of European citizens, European data protection authorities found several breaches to the fundamental data protection principles, in particular relating to transfers of personal data to third countries (see Article 29 WP opinion 10/2006). Also, the EDPS adopted an opinion focusing on the role of the European Central Bank (see EDPS opinion).
Following these findings, many improvements were put in place in order to ensure full compliance with data protection legislation: SWIFT adhered to the Safe Harbor; the US Treasury provided clarifications and assurances concerning access and processing of SWIFT data; SWIFT announced important changes in the architecture of its payment services, ensuring that intra-European messages remain in Europe and are no longer mirrored in the United States.
See also: Safe Harbor and TFTP
A breach of security occurs where a stated organisational policy or legal requirement regarding information security has been violated. However, every incident which suggests that the confidentiality, integrity or availability of the information has been compromised can be considered a security incident. Every security breach will always be initiated by a security incident which, only if confirmed, may become a breach.