ExamGecko
Question list
Search
Search

List of questions

Search

Related questions


SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: ProStorage is a multinational cloud storage provider headquartered in the Netherlands. Its CEO. Ruth Brown, has developed a two-pronged strategy for growth: 1) expand ProStorage s global customer base and 2) increase ProStorage's sales force by efficiently onboarding effective teams. Enacting this strategy has recently been complicated by Ruth's health condition, which has limited her working hours, as well as her ability to travel to meet potential customers. ProStorage's Human Resources department and Ruth's Chief of Staff now work together to manage her schedule and ensure that she is able to make all her medical appointments The latter has become especially crucial after Ruth's last trip to India, where she suffered a medical emergency and was hospitalized m New Delhi Unable to reach Ruths family, the hospital reached out to ProStorage and was able to connect with her Chief of Staff, who in coordination with Mary, the head of HR. provided information to the doctors based on accommodate on requests Ruth made when she started a: ProStorage In support of Ruth's strategic goals of hiring more sales representatives, the Human Resources team is focused on improving its processes to ensure that new employees are sourced, interviewed, hired, and onboarded efficiently. To help with this, Mary identified two vendors, HRYourWay, a German based company, and InstaHR, an Australian based company. She decided to have both vendors go through ProStorage's vendor risk review process so she can work with Ruth to make the final decision. As part of the review process, Jackie, who is responsible for maintaining ProStorage's privacy program (including maintaining controller BCRs and conducting vendor risk assessments), reviewed both vendors but completed a transfer impact assessment only for InstaHR. After her review of both boasted a more established privacy program and provided third-party attestations, whereas HRYourWay was a small vendor with minimal data protection operations. Thus, she recommended InstaHR. ProStorage's marketing team also worked to meet the strategic goals of the company by focusing on industries where it needed to grow its market share. To help with this, the team selected as a partner UpFinance, a US based company with deep connections to financial industry customers. During ProStorage's diligence process, Jackie from the privacy team noted in the transfer impact assessment that UpFinance implements several data protection measures including end-to-end encryption, with encryption keys held by the customer. Notably, UpFinance has not received any government requests in its 7 years of business. Still, Jackie recommended that the contract require UpFinance to notify ProStorage if it receives a government request for personal data UpFinance processes on its behalf prior to disclosing such data. What transfer mechanism did ProStorage most likely rely on to transfer Ruth's medical information to the hospital?








SCENARIO Please use the following to answer the next question: Brady is a computer programmer based in New Zealand who has been running his own business for two years. Brady's business provides a low-cost suite of services to customers throughout the European Economic Area (EEA). The services are targeted towards new and aspiring small business owners. Brady's company, called Brady Box, provides web page design services, a Social Networking Service (SNS) and consulting services that help people manage their own online stores. Unfortunately, Brady has been receiving some complaints. A customer named Anna recently uploaded her plans for a new product onto Brady Box's chat area, which is open to public viewing. Although she realized her mistake two weeks later and removed the document, Anna is holding Brady Box responsible for not noticing the error through regular monitoring of the website. Brady believes he should not be held liable. Another customer, Felipe, was alarmed to discover that his personal information was transferred to a third- party contractor called Hermes Designs and worries that sensitive information regarding his business plans may be misused. Brady does not believe he violated European privacy rules. He provides a privacy notice to all of his customers explicitly stating that personal data may be transferred to specific third parties in fulfillment of a requested service. Felipe says he read the privacy notice but that it was long and complicated Brady continues to insist that Felipe has no need to be concerned, as he can personally vouch for the integrity of Hermes Designs. In fact, Hermes Designs has taken the initiative to create sample customized banner advertisements for customers like Felipe. Brady is happy to provide a link to the example banner ads, now posted on the Hermes Designs webpage. Hermes Designs plans on following up with direct marketing to these customers. Brady was surprised when another customer, Serge, expressed his dismay that a quotation by him is being used within a graphic collage on Brady Box's home webpage. The quotation is attributed to Serge by first and last name. Brady, however, was not worried about any sort of litigation. He wrote back to Serge to let him know that he found the quotation within Brady Box's Social Networking Service (SNS), as Serge himself had posted the quotation. In his response, Brady did offer to remove the quotation as a courtesy. Despite some customer complaints, Brady's business is flourishing. He even supplements his income through online behavioral advertising (OBA) via a third-party ad network with whom he has set clearly defined roles. Brady is pleased that, although some customers are not explicitly aware of the OBA, the advertisements contain useful products and services. Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), what is the most likely reason Serge may have grounds to object to the use of his quotation?

Question 214 - CIPP-E discussion

Report
Export

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?

A.

Both parties are exempt, as the company is involved in human health research

Answers
A.

Both parties are exempt, as the company is involved in human health research

B.

Jack and the pharmaceutical company are jointly liable.

Answers
B.

Jack and the pharmaceutical company are jointly liable.

C.

The pharmaceutical company is liable.

Answers
C.

The pharmaceutical company is liable.

D.

Jack is liable

Answers
D.

Jack is liable

Suggested answer: D

Explanation:

Article 82 of the GDPR introduces a right to compensation for damage caused as a result of an infringement of the GDPR1.Article 82 (1) states that any person who has suffered material or non-material damage as a result of an infringement of the GDPR shall have the right to receive compensation from the controller or processor for the damage suffered1.Article 82 (2) states that any controller involved in processing shall be liable for the damage caused by processing which infringes the GDPR1.A processor shall be liable for the damage caused by processing only where it has not complied with obligations of the GDPR specifically directed to processors or where it has acted outside or contrary to lawful instructions of the controller1.Article 82 (3) states that a controller or processor shall be exempt from liability under paragraph 2 if it proves that it is not in any way responsible for the event giving rise to the damage1. In this case, Jack is liable for the damage caused by the data breach, as he violated the GDPR by posting the patient's name and health information, along with disparaging comments, on a social media website.This constitutes an infringement of the GDPR, as it violates the principles of lawfulness, fairness, and transparency (Article 5 (1) (a)), purpose limitation (Article 5 (1) (b)), data minimisation (Article 5 (1) ), accuracy (Article 5 (1) (d)), integrity and confidentiality (Article 5 (1) (f)), and the rights of the data subject (Articles 12-23)1. The pharmaceutical company is not liable for the damage caused by the data breach, as it can prove that it is not in any way responsible for the event giving rise to the damage. The company provided privacy training to Jack, informed him of the privacy policy, obtained his consent, and dismissed him as soon as the breach was discovered.Therefore, the company complied with the obligations of the GDPR, such as the accountability principle (Article 5 (2)), the data protection by design and by default principle (Article 25), the security of processing principle (Article 32), and the notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority principle (Article 33)1. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.Reference:Art. 82 GDPR -- Right to compensation and liability,Article 82 GDPR - GDPRhub

asked 22/11/2024
Avinash Jindal
38 questions
User
Your answer:
0 comments
Sorted by

Leave a comment first