Requires controllers and processors to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk.
Definition
Excerpt
Taking into account the state of the art, the costs of implementation and the nature, scope, context and purposes of processing as well as the risk of varying likelihood and severity for the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller and the processor shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk, including inter alia 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 and access to personal data in a timely manner in the event of a physical or technical incident; a process for regularly testing, assessing and evaluating the effectiveness of technical and organisational measures for ensuring the security of the processing.
In assessing the appropriate level of security account shall be taken in particular of the risks that are presented by processing, in particular from accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure of, or access to personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed.
Adherence to an approved code of conduct as referred to in Article 40 or an approved certification mechanism as referred to in Article 42 may be used as an element by which to demonstrate compliance with the requirements set out in paragraph 1 of this Article.
The controller and processor shall take steps to ensure that any natural person acting under the authority of the controller or the processor who has access to personal data does not process them except on instructions from the controller, unless he or she is required to do so by Union or Member State law.
Related cases
Carrefour France has been fined by CNIL for violating GDPR and French data protection laws, including excessive data retention, unclear data processes, inadequate response to requests, security breaches, and unlawful use of cookies. They also sent prospecting emails despite objections and did not provide unsubscribe links.
A controller was fined by the AEPD for inadequate cookie information on its website, including a lack of information on tracking cookies and a vague cookie policy without an easy uninstall tool.
Miguel Ibáñez Bezanilla was fined by the Spanish DPA for multiple violations related to his website. These included the absence of a banner on cookies usage, insufficient information on the identity, features, and length of cookies, and the lack of an option to refuse them. The website was found to be technically unsafe, the privacy policy was not updated, and the provided cookie information was inadequate.
The ICO issued a penalty against Unite the Union for unsolicited direct marketing calls despite having explicitly opted out and by those who had not given informed valid consent to receive such calls.
Related deceptive patterns
The user wants to do something, but they are required to do something else undesirable in return.
The user finds it easy to sign up or subscribe, but when they want to cancel they find it very hard.
The user is drawn into a transaction on false pretences, because pertinent information is hidden or delayed from being presented to them.
The user tries to do something, but they are persistently interrupted by requests to do something else that may not be in their best interests.