Bob Bell Bob Bell's Profile Page

Bob Bell Bob Bell

0 Course Enrolled • 0 Course Completed

Biography

Training CIPP-E Pdf - CIPP-E Original Questions

BONUS!!! Download part of Free4Dump CIPP-E dumps for free: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-lPYN2FKiM_vwiboRgxErh88tLAVDdsB

There are three versions of our CIPP-E learning engine which can allow all kinds of our customers to use conveniently in different situations. They are the PDF, Software and APP online versions. I specially recomend the APP online version of our CIPP-E Exam Dumps. With the online app version of our CIPP-E actual exam, you can just feel free to practice the questions in our CIPP-E training materials on all kinds of electronic devices, such as IPAD, telephone, computer and so on!

IAPP CIPP-E (Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe) Exam is designed for professionals who are interested in gaining expertise in European data protection laws and regulations. Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) certification is internationally recognized and is a valuable asset for professionals working in the field of privacy and data protection.

>> Training CIPP-E Pdf <<

Free PDF IAPP - CIPP-E - Pass-Sure Training Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) Pdf

You may feel astonished and doubtful about this figure; but we do make our CIPP-E exam dumps well received by most customers. Better still, the 98-99% pass rate has helped most of the candidates get the certification successfully, which is far beyond that of others in this field. In recent years, supported by our professional expert team, our CIPP-E test braindumps have grown up and have made huge progress. Our CIPP-E Exam Dumps strive for providing you a comfortable study platform and continuously explore more functions to meet every customer’s requirements. We may foresee the prosperous talent market with more and more workers attempting to reach a high level through the IAPP certification.

IAPP Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) Sample Questions (Q43-Q48):

NEW QUESTION # 43
Based on GDPR Article 35, which of the following situations would trigger the need to complete a DPIA?

A. A company wants to use location data to infer information on a person's clothes purchasing habits.
B. A company wants to combine location data with other data in order to offer more personalized service for the customer.
C. A company wants to build a dating app that creates candidate profiles based on location data and data from third-party sources.
D. A company wants to use location data to track delivery trucks in order to make the routes more efficient.

Answer: C

Explanation:
Explanation/Reference: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:aQkU17eX9sQJ:https:// www.shlegal.com/insights/article-29-data-protection-working-party-gdpr-guidelines-on-data-protection-impact- assessments&client=firefox-b-e&hl=en&gl=pk&strip=1&vwsrc=0

NEW QUESTION # 44
Which of the following would require designating a data protection officer?

A. Processing is carried out for the purpose of providing for-profit goods or services to individuals in the EU.
B. The core activities of the controller or processor consist of processing operations of financial information or information relating to children.
C. The core activities of the controller or processor consist of processing operations that require systematic monitoring of data subjects on a large scale.
D. Processing is carried out by an organization employing 250 persons or more.

Answer: C

Explanation:
Reference https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection- regulation-gdpr/accountability-and-governance/data-protection-officers/

NEW QUESTION # 45
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Gentle Hedgehog Inc. is a privately owned website design agency incorporated in Italy. The company has numerous remote workers in different EU countries. Recently, the management of Gentle Hedgehog noticed a decrease in productivity of their sales team, especially among remote workers. As a result, the company plans to implement a robust but privacy-friendly remote surveillance system to prevent absenteeism, reward top performers, and ensure the best quality of customer service when sales people are interacting with customers.
Gentle Hedgehog eventually hires Sauron Eye Inc., a Chinese vendor of employee surveillance software whose European headquarters is in Germany. Sauron Eye's software provides powerful remote-monitoring capabilities, including 24/7 access to computer cameras and microphones, screen captures, emails, website history, and keystrokes. Any device can be remotely monitored from a central server that is securely installed at Gentle Hedgehog headquarters. The monitoring is invisible by default; however, a so-called Transparent Mode, which regularly and conspicuously notifies all users about the monitoring and its precise scope, also exists. Additionally, the monitored employees are required to use a built-in verification technology involving facial recognition each time they log in.
All monitoring data, including the facial recognition data, is securely stored in Microsoft Azure cloud servers operated by Sauron Eye, which are physically located in France.
Under what condition could the surveillance system be used on the personal devices of employees?

A. Only if the employer offers an adequate compensation for using the employee's devices.
B. Only if the employees give valid consent and the monitoring is narrowly limited to their professional tasks.
C. Only if the monitoring system is manufactured by a European vendor storing the monitoring data within the EU.
D. Only if the cloud that stores the monitoring data is certified by the EDPB as GDPR compliant.

Answer: B

Explanation:
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) does not prohibit surveillance of employees in the workplace. Still, it requires employers to follow special rules to ensure that the rights and freedoms of employees are protected when processing their personal data. The GDPR applies to any processing of personal data in the context of the activities of an establishment of a controller or a processor in the EU, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the EU or not. The GDPR also applies to the processing of personal data of data subjects who are in the EU by a controller or processor not established in the EU, where the processing activities are related to the offering of goods or services to data subjects in the EU or the monitoring of their behaviour as far as their behaviour takes place within the EU.
The GDPR requires that any processing of personal data must be lawful, fair and transparent, and based on one of the six legal grounds specified in the regulation. The most relevant legal grounds for employee surveillance are the legitimate interests of the employer, the performance of a contract with the employee, or the compliance with a legal obligation. The GDPR also requires that any processing of personal data must be limited to what is necessary for the purposes for which they are processed, and that the data subjects must be informed of the purposes and the legal basis of the processing, as well as their rights and the safeguards in place to protect their data.
The GDPR also imposes specific obligations and restrictions on the processing of special categories of personal data, such as biometric data, which reveal racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, or which are processed for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person. The processing of such data is prohibited, unless one of the ten exceptions listed in the regulation applies. The most relevant exceptions for employee surveillance are the explicit consent of the data subject, the necessity for the purposes of carrying out the obligations and exercising specific rights of the controller or of the data subject in the field of employment and social security and social protection law, or the necessity for reasons of substantial public interest.
The GDPR also sets out the rules and requirements for the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations, which do not ensure an adequate level of data protection. The transfer of such data is only allowed if the controller or processor has provided appropriate safeguards, such as binding corporate rules, standard contractual clauses, codes of conduct or certification mechanisms, and if the data subjects have enforceable rights and effective legal remedies.
Based on the scenario, the only condition under which the surveillance system could be used on the personal devices of employees is if the employees give valid consent and the monitoring is narrowly limited to their professional tasks. This option is the most consistent with the GDPR's principles and requirements, as it:
Is based on a valid legal ground for the processing of personal data, namely the consent of the data subject, which must be freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous, and which can be withdrawn at any time.
Is limited to what is necessary for the purposes of the monitoring, as it only covers the work-related activities and communications of the employees, and excludes the private or personal ones.
Is transparent to the employees, as it informs them of the monitoring and its precise scope, and gives them the opportunity to object or opt out of the monitoring.
Does not involve the processing of special categories of personal data, such as biometric data or data revealing political opinions or trade union membership, which are not necessary or proportionate for the purposes of the monitoring, and which do not fall under any of the exceptions listed in the regulation.
Does not involve the transfer of personal data to a third country, such as China, which does not provide an adequate level of data protection, and which may pose additional risks for the rights and freedoms of the employees.
The other options listed in the question are not valid conditions for using the surveillance system on the personal devices of employees, as they:
Are not based on a valid legal ground for the processing of personal data, as they either rely on the legitimate interests of the employer, which are not balanced with the rights and freedoms of the employees, or on the compliance with a legal obligation, which does not apply to the use of personal devices.
Are not limited to what is necessary for the purposes of the monitoring, as they involve the collection and processing of excessive and irrelevant personal data, such as camera and microphone monitoring, screen captures, keystrokes, and facial recognition data, which go beyond the scope of the work performed by the employees, and intrude into their private or personal sphere.
Are not transparent to the employees, as they do not inform them of the monitoring and its precise scope, and do not give them the opportunity to object or opt out of the monitoring.
Involve the processing of special categories of personal data, such as biometric data or data revealing political opinions or trade union membership, which are not necessary or proportionate for the purposes of the monitoring, and which do not fall under any of the exceptions listed in the regulation.
Involve the transfer of personal data to a third country, such as China, which does not provide an adequate level of data protection, and which may pose additional risks for the rights and freedoms of the employees.
Reference:
GDPR, Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, and 49.
EDPB Guidelines 3/2019 on processing of personal data through video devices, pages 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14.
EDPB Guidelines 07/2020 on the concepts of controller and processor in the GDPR, pages 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28.
EDPB Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection by Design and by Default, pages 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28.
EDPB Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679, pages 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12.
Data protection: GDPR and employee surveilance | Feature | Law Gazette, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

NEW QUESTION # 46
Under the GDPR, who would be LEAST likely to be allowed to engage in the collection, use, and disclosure of a data subject's sensitive medical information without the data subject's knowledge or consent?

A. A health professional involved in the medical care for the data subject, where the data subject's life hinges on the timely dissemination of such information.
B. A journalist writing an article relating to the medical condition in QUESTION, who believes that the publication of such information is in the public interest.
C. A public authority responsible for public health, where the sharing of such information is considered necessary for the protection of the general populace.
D. A member of the judiciary involved in adjudicating a legal dispute involving the data subject and concerning the health of the data subject.

Answer: B

Explanation:
The GDPR defines data concerning health as a special category of personal data that is subject to specific processing conditions and safeguards. The GDPR prohibits the processing of such data unless one of the exceptions in Article 9 applies. One of these exceptions is the explicit consent of the data subject, which means that the data subject has given a clear and affirmative indication of their agreement to the processing of their health data. Another exception is when the processing is necessary for reasons of public interest in the area of public health, such as protecting against serious cross-border threats to health or ensuring high standards of quality and safety of health care. A third exception is when the processing is necessary for the purposes of preventive or occupational medicine, for the assessment of the working capacity of the employee, medical diagnosis, the provision of health or social care or treatment or the management of health or social care systems and services. These exceptions are based on the principle of necessity, which means that the processing must be strictly necessary for a specific purpose and cannot be achieved by other means.
In the given scenario, the journalist does not fall under any of these exceptions. The journalist is not a health professional, a public authority, or a person who has obtained the explicit consent of the data subject. The journalist is not processing the data for any legitimate purpose related to public health, medical care, or social protection. The journalist is merely pursuing their own interest in publishing a story that may or may not be in the public interest. The journalist is not respecting the data subject's rights and freedoms, especially their right to privacy and confidentiality. Therefore, the journalist would be least likely to be allowed to engage in the collection, use, and disclosure of the data subject's sensitive medical information without their knowledge or consent. References:
* Article 4 (15) and Article 9 of the GDPR
* Health data | ICO
* What does the GDPR mean for personal data in medical reports?
* Sensitive data and medical confidentiality - FutureLearn
* Health data and data privacy: storing sensitive data under GDPR

NEW QUESTION # 47
Sanctions for non-compliance with the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (Al Act) could result in a maximum fine of?

A. The higher of up to 40 million Euro or up to 8% of the entity's total worldwide turnover for the preceding financial year.
B. The higher of up to 10 million Euro or up to 2% of the entity's total worldwide turnover for the preceding financial year.
C. The higher of up to 30 million Euro or up to 6% of the entity's total worldwide turnover for the preceding financial year.
D. The higher of up to 20 million Euro or up to 4% of the entity's total worldwide turnover for the preceding financial year.

Answer: C

Explanation:
The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) is a proposed regulation that aims to establish harmonised rules on the development and use of artificial intelligence in the EU. The AI Act classifies AI systems according to their level of risk and imposes various requirements and obligations on providers and users of such systems. The AI Act also provides for the enforcement of its rules by national competent authorities and the European Commission. According to Article 71 of the AI Act, the sanctions for non-compliance with the AI Act depend on the type and severity of the infringement. The maximum fine for the most serious infringements, such as placing on the market or putting into service prohibited AI systems, or failing to comply with the data and data governance requirements for high-risk AI systems, is the higher of up to 30 million Euro or up to 6% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year of the legal entity concerned. This is the same level of fine as for the most serious infringements of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Reference:
* EUR-Lex - 52021PC0206 - EN - EUR-Lex1
* European Parliament Adopts Negotiating Position on the AI Act2

NEW QUESTION # 48
......

Our Free4Dump website try our best for the majority of examinees to provide the best and most convenient service. Under the joint efforts of everyone for many years, the passing rate of Free4Dump IAPP's CIPP-E Certification Exam has reached as high as100%. If you buy our CIPP-E exam certification training materials, we will also provide one year free renewal service. Hurry up!

CIPP-E Original Questions: https://www.free4dump.com/CIPP-E-braindumps-torrent.html

2025 Latest Free4Dump CIPP-E PDF Dumps and CIPP-E Exam Engine Free Share: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-lPYN2FKiM_vwiboRgxErh88tLAVDdsB