At the International Association of Privacy Professionals’ (“IAPP’s”) recent Europe Data Protection Congress in Brussels, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton & Williams (the “Centre”) led two panels on the risk-based approach to privacy as a tool for implementing existing privacy principles more effectively and on codes of conduct as a means for creating interoperability between different privacy regimes.
Risk
Bojana Bellamy, the Centre’s President, led a panel entitled Privacy Risk Framework and Risk-based Approach: Delivering Effective Data Protection in Practice. Together with Mikko Niva of Nokia Corporation and JoAnn Stonier of MasterCard, the panelists discussed the emergence of a new way of implementing effective privacy protections and calibrating privacy programs based on understanding the actual risks to individuals and benefits that are associated with processing personal data.
The “risk-based approach” to privacy, which currently is the focus of a Centre project to develop a widely accepted and coherent methodology for understanding risk, is already reflected in various forms in certain existing laws (e.g., EU Data Protection Directive, FTC Act), international privacy principles and guidelines (e.g., APEC and OECD), and privacy impact assessment guidance. Indeed, according to the panelists, risk assessments are not only required by various laws, they are an integral component of organizational accountability regardless of any legal requirements. Thus, the panelists discussed how their organizations currently employ risk assessments to implement such accountability and to ensure both compliance with the law and effective privacy protections. They also discussed how the risk-based approach focuses not only on the risk to organizations, but also on the risk to individuals. Finally, the panelist gave an overview of how the Council of the European Union that is working on the proposed EU General Data Protection Regulation has incorporated the risk-based approach as a general obligation and in specific provisions.
To avoid any misconception, the panelists stressed that the risk-based approach does not change or replace any applicable legal requirements and does not alter the rights of individuals under data protection laws. It simply is an additional tool that improves privacy compliance programs by linking privacy controls and mitigations to the likelihood and severity of the harms associated with processing personal data.
Interoperability
Markus Heyder, the Centre’s Vice President and Senior Policy Counselor, moderated a panel on EU BCRs and APEC CBPRs: Cornerstones of Future Interoperability. He and his co-panelists Florence Raynal of the French Data Protection Authority (“CNIL”), Christina Peters of IBM Corporation, Hilary Wandell of Merck & Co. and Daniel Pradelles of Hewlett-Packard, introduced the basics of the APEC Cross-Border Privacy Rules (“CBPRs”) to a mainly European audience. They also discussed the work that is currently being done by a joint working group of the Article 29 Working Party and the APEC Data Privacy Subgroup on the development of tools that help companies become certified and approved under both the EU Binding Corporate Rules (“BCRs”) and the CBPRs.
Florence Raynal explained the joint working group’s “Referential” from last March, which mapped the respective substantive requirements of the two systems to each other, identifying substantial overlap as well as some differences. She also explained the ongoing follow-up work to the Referential, whereby the working group is conducting case studies with the help of several companies that have or are seeking dual certification/approval under the CBPR and BCRs. The purpose of this exercise is to test the usefulness of the Referential and to consider what additional practical tools might be developed to enable companies to leverage compliance with one system into more efficient approval under the other.
The three company representatives told the audience how certification to one code of conduct such as the CBPRs or BCRs have helped facilitate effective internal accountability and compliance programs and positioned them well for achieving compliance and approval under the other system. The case studies are ongoing and will be formally discussed by the joint working group at the upcoming APEC Data Privacy Subgroup meetings in the Philippines in late January 2015.
Search
Recent Posts
- Website Use of Third-Party Tracking Software Not Prohibited Under Massachusetts Wiretap Act
- HHS Announces Additional Settlements Following Ransomware Attacks Including First Enforcement Under Risk Analysis Initiative
- Employee Monitoring: Increased Use Draws Increased Scrutiny from Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Categories
- Behavioral Advertising
- Centre for Information Policy Leadership
- Children’s Privacy
- Cyber Insurance
- Cybersecurity
- Enforcement
- European Union
- Events
- FCRA
- Financial Privacy
- General
- Health Privacy
- Identity Theft
- Information Security
- International
- Marketing
- Multimedia Resources
- Online Privacy
- Security Breach
- U.S. Federal Law
- U.S. State Law
- Workplace Privacy
Tags
- Aaron Simpson
- Accountability
- Adequacy
- Advertisement
- Advertising
- American Privacy Rights Act
- Anna Pateraki
- Anonymization
- Anti-terrorism
- APEC
- Apple Inc.
- Argentina
- Arkansas
- Article 29 Working Party
- Artificial Intelligence
- Australia
- Austria
- Automated Decisionmaking
- Baltimore
- Bankruptcy
- Belgium
- Biden Administration
- Big Data
- Binding Corporate Rules
- Biometric Data
- Blockchain
- Bojana Bellamy
- Brazil
- Brexit
- British Columbia
- Brittany Bacon
- Brussels
- Business Associate Agreement
- BYOD
- California
- CAN-SPAM
- Canada
- Cayman Islands
- CCPA
- CCTV
- Chile
- China
- Chinese Taipei
- Christopher Graham
- CIPA
- Class Action
- Clinical Trial
- Cloud
- Cloud Computing
- CNIL
- Colombia
- Colorado
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Compliance
- Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Congress
- Connecticut
- Consent
- Consent Order
- Consumer Protection
- Cookies
- COPPA
- Coronavirus/COVID-19
- Council of Europe
- Council of the European Union
- Court of Justice of the European Union
- CPPA
- CPRA
- Credit Monitoring
- Credit Report
- Criminal Law
- Critical Infrastructure
- Croatia
- Cross-Border Data Flow
- Cyber Attack
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- Data Brokers
- Data Controller
- Data Localization
- Data Privacy Framework
- Data Processor
- Data Protection Act
- Data Protection Authority
- Data Protection Impact Assessment
- Data Transfer
- David Dumont
- David Vladeck
- Delaware
- Denmark
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Justice
- Department of the Treasury
- District of Columbia
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- Dobbs
- Dodd-Frank Act
- DPIA
- E-Privacy
- E-Privacy Directive
- Ecuador
- Ed Tech
- Edith Ramirez
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act
- Electronic Privacy Information Center
- Elizabeth Denham
- Employee Monitoring
- Encryption
- ENISA
- EU Data Protection Directive
- EU Member States
- European Commission
- European Data Protection Board
- European Data Protection Supervisor
- European Parliament
- Facial Recognition Technology
- FACTA
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Federal Communications Commission
- Federal Data Protection Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- FERC
- FinTech
- Florida
- Food and Drug Administration
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
- France
- Franchise
- Fred Cate
- Freedom of Information Act
- Freedom of Speech
- Fundamental Rights
- GDPR
- Geofencing
- Geolocation
- Georgia
- Germany
- Global Privacy Assembly
- Global Privacy Enforcement Network
- Gramm Leach Bliley Act
- Hacker
- Hawaii
- Health Data
- Health Information
- HIPAA
- HIPPA
- HITECH Act
- Hong Kong
- House of Representatives
- Hungary
- Illinois
- India
- Indiana
- Indonesia
- Information Commissioners Office
- Information Sharing
- Insurance Provider
- Internal Revenue Service
- International Association of Privacy Professionals
- International Commissioners Office
- Internet
- Internet of Things
- IP Address
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Jacob Kohnstamm
- Japan
- Jason Beach
- Jay Rockefeller
- Jenna Rode
- Jennifer Stoddart
- Jersey
- Jessica Rich
- John Delionado
- John Edwards
- Kentucky
- Korea
- Latin America
- Laura Leonard
- Law Enforcement
- Lawrence Strickling
- Legislation
- Liability
- Lisa Sotto
- Litigation
- Location-Based Services
- London
- Madrid Resolution
- Maine
- Malaysia
- Markus Heyder
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Meta
- Mexico
- Microsoft
- Minnesota
- Mobile App
- Mobile Device
- Montana
- Morocco
- MySpace
- Natascha Gerlach
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Science and Technology Council
- National Security
- National Security Agency
- National Telecommunications and Information Administration
- Nebraska
- NEDPA
- Netherlands
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New Zealand
- Nigeria
- Ninth Circuit
- North Carolina
- Norway
- Obama Administration
- OECD
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Foreign Assets Control
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Opt-In Consent
- Oregon
- Outsourcing
- Pakistan
- Parental Consent
- Payment Card
- PCI DSS
- Penalty
- Pennsylvania
- Personal Data
- Personal Health Information
- Personal Information
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Peru
- Philippines
- Phyllis Marcus
- Poland
- PRISM
- Privacy By Design
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Rights
- Privacy Rule
- Privacy Shield
- Protected Health Information
- Ransomware
- Record Retention
- Red Flags Rule
- Regulation
- Rhode Island
- Richard Thomas
- Right to Be Forgotten
- Right to Privacy
- Risk-Based Approach
- Rosemary Jay
- Russia
- Safe Harbor
- Sanctions
- Schrems
- Scott Kimpel
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Security Rule
- Senate
- Serbia
- Service Provider
- Singapore
- Smart Grid
- Smart Metering
- Social Media
- Social Security Number
- South Africa
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- South Korea
- Spain
- Spyware
- Standard Contractual Clauses
- State Attorneys General
- Steven Haas
- Stick With Security Series
- Stored Communications Act
- Student Data
- Supreme Court
- Surveillance
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Targeted Advertising
- Telecommunications
- Telemarketing
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- Tennessee
- Terry McAuliffe
- Texas
- Text Message
- Thailand
- Transparency
- Transportation Security Administration
- Trump Administration
- United Arab Emirates
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Unmanned Aircraft Systems
- Uruguay
- Utah
- Vermont
- Video Privacy Protection Act
- Video Surveillance
- Virginia
- Viviane Reding
- Washington
- Whistleblowing
- Wireless Network
- Wiretap
- ZIP Code