Data subject requests: the clause the question tests
How requests from the people whose data it is are handled, and who answers them.
How the customer usually asks it
example"How do you handle data subject access and erasure requests?"
Anchor clauses
4 frameworks| Framework | Anchor clause |
|---|---|
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 | 5.34 Privacy and protection of personal identifiable information (PII) |
| SIG (Shared Assessments) | domain O Privacy |
| CSA Cloud Controls Matrix v4.0.1 | DSP-11 Personal Data Access, Reversal, Rectification and Deletion |
| GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 | Art. 15 Right of access by the data subject · Art. 28 Processor |
Every framework that anchors this family is listed here; a register shows the ones ticked for the customer.
Evidence expected
The procedure for passing a data subject request to the customer and assisting with it, with the time the supplier commits to.
The clauses, with what an assessor asks for
ISO 27001 5.34 Privacy and protection of personal identifiable information (PII)Identify and meet privacy and PII-protection requirements from law, regulation and contract.
Where answers usually fall short: Missing documented consent for all data subjects; Incomplete inventory of PII across legacy systems
Source: ISO/IEC 27001:2022
SIG domain O PrivacyWhat it asks for, in one line (the standard's own text is not quoted here):
Manage personal data in accordance with applicable privacy laws and contractual obligations, including data subject rights, lawful basis, cross border transfers, and breach notification.
Where answers usually fall short: No transfer impact assessment for non adequacy jurisdictions; DSR metrics not tracked against statutory deadlines
Source: SIG (Shared Assessments)
CSA CCM DSP-11 Personal Data Access, Reversal, Rectification and DeletionWhat it asks for, in one line (the standard's own text is not quoted here):
Give data subjects a working route to request access to, correction of or deletion of their personal data, and fulfil those requests as applicable law requires.
Where answers usually fall short: Request route published with no process behind it; Deletion performed in the primary system while backups and exports retain the data
Source: CSA Cloud Controls Matrix v4.0.1
GDPR Art. 15 Right of access by the data subjectOn request, confirm whether personal data concerning the data subject is being processed and, where it is, provide access to that data together with the purposes, the categories of personal data, the recipients or categories of recipient including any in third countries or international organisations, the envisaged storage period or the criteria setting it, the existence of the rights to rectification, erasure, restriction and objection, the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, any available information on the source where the data was not collected from the data subject, and the existence of automated decision-making including profiling with meaningful information about the logic involved and its significance and envisaged consequences. Where data has been transferred to a third country, inform the data subject of the Article 46 safeguards relating to the transfer. Provide a copy of the personal data undergoing processing, in a commonly used electronic form where the request was made electronically, free for the first copy and at a reasonable fee based on administrative costs for further copies. The right to obtain a copy must not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others.
Where answers usually fall short: Structured database records returned while email, chat, ticketing and free text notes naming the person are never searched; The copy of the data provided with none of the supplementary information the Article requires alongside it
Source: GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679
GDPR Art. 28 ProcessorUse 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.
Where answers usually fall short: The processor's own standard terms accepted, which commonly omit the audit right, the deletion choice and the instruction infringement notice; A processor inventory that misses tools adopted directly by individual teams, which is where undocumented processing usually sits
Source: GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679