IAPP CIPP-E인증시험덤프문제 & CIPP-E 100％시험패스덤프

IAPP인증 CIPP-E시험은 등록하였는데 시험준비는 아직이라구요? IAPP인증 CIPP-E시험일이 다가오고 있는데 공부를 하지 않아 두려워 하고 계시는 분들은 이 글을 보는 순간 시험패스에 자신을 가지게 될것입니다. 시험준비 시간이 적다고 하여 패스할수 없는건 아닙니다. ExamPassdump의IAPP인증 CIPP-E덤프와의 근사한 만남이IAPP인증 CIPP-E패스에 화이팅을 불러드립니다. 덤프에 있는 문제만 공부하면 되기에 시험일이 며칠뒤라도 시험패스는 문제없습니다. 더는 공부하지 않은 자신을 원망하지 마시고 결단성있게ExamPassdump의IAPP인증 CIPP-E덤프로 시험패스에 고고싱하세요.

CIPP/E 인증 시험은 유럽 데이터 보호법에 대한 지식을 시험하는 엄격하고 도전적인 시험입니다. 시험은 90개의 객관식 문제로 이루어져 있으며 시험 시간은 3시간입니다. 이 시험은 EU 법률 및 규정, 데이터 보호 원칙, 데이터 보호 통치 및 관리, 데이터 침해와 사고 대응 등 여러 주제를 다룹니다. 이 시험은 영어, 독일어, 프랑스어, 스페인어 등 여러 언어로 제공됩니다.

CIPP/E 시험은 유럽의 데이터 보호 법률 및 규정과 관련된 다양한 주제를 다루며, 일반 데이터 보호 규정(GDPR)을 포함합니다. 이 시험은 개인 정보의 수집, 사용 및 공개를 관리하고 보호하는 전문가들의 지식, 기술 및 능력을 시험하도록 설계되었으며, 유럽 개인 정보 보호 전문가들에게는 개인 정보 보호 인증의 황금 표준으로 인정됩니다.

CIPP/E 인증의 주요 목표 중 하나는 개인 정보 보호 전문가들이 2018년에 발효된 EU의 데이터 보호 법인 일반 개인정보 보호 규정(GDPR)의 복잡성을 이해하는 데에 도움을 주는 것입니다. GDPR는 조직이 개인 데이터를 수집, 처리, 저장 및 전송하는 방식을 크게 변경했으며, 개인 정보 보호 전문가들은 조직이 법에 준수하기 위해 그 요구 사항을 철저히 이해해야 합니다.

>> IAPP CIPP-E인증시험 덤프문제 <<

CIPP-E 100％시험패스 덤프 & CIPP-E퍼펙트 최신 덤프자료

우리ExamPassdump에서는 각종IT시험에 관심있는분들을 위하여, 여러 가지 인증시험자료를 제공하는 사이트입니다. 우리ExamPassdump는 많은 분들이 IT인증시험을 응시하여 성공할수록 도와주는 사이트입니다. 우리의 파워는 아주 대단하답니다. 여러분은 우리ExamPassdump 사이트에서 제공하는IAPP CIPP-E관련자료의 일부분문제와답등 샘플을 무료로 다운받아 체험해봄으로 우리에 믿음이 생기게 될 것입니다.

최신 Certified Information Privacy Professional CIPP-E 무료샘플문제 (Q152-Q157):

질문 # 152
Under Article 21 of the GDPR, a controller must stop profiling when requested by a data subject, unless it can demonstrate compelling legitimate grounds that override the interests of the individual. In the Guidelines on Automated individual decision-making and Profiling, the WP 29 says the controller needs to do all of the following to demonstrate that it has such legitimate grounds EXCEPT?

A. Demonstrate that the profiling is for the purposes of direct marketing.
B. Consider the impact of the profiling on the data subject's interest, rights and freedoms.
C. Carry out an exercise that weighs the interests of the controller and the basis for the data subject's objection.
D. Consider the importance of the profiling to their particular objective.

정답：A

설명：
According to the UK GDPR, the data subject has the right to object, on grounds relating to his or her particular situation, to the processing of personal data concerning him or her which is based on point (e) or (f) of Article 6(1), including profiling based on those provisions1. The controller must stop the processing unless it demonstrates compelling legitimate grounds for the processing which override the interests, rights and freedoms of the data subject or for the establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims1. The WP 29 Guidelines on Automated individual decision-making and Profiling provide some guidance on how to assess the existence of such compelling legitimate grounds2. The controller needs to carry out an exercise that weighs the interests of the controller and the basis for the data subject's objection, consider the impact of the profiling on the data subject's interest, rights and freedoms, and consider the importance of the profiling to their particular objective2. However, the controller does not need to demonstrate that the profiling is for the purposes of direct marketing, as this is a separate ground for objection under Article 21(2) of the UK GDPR, which gives the data subject an absolute right to object to such processing13. Therefore, option C is the correct answer, as it is not required by the controller to demonstrate that it has compelling legitimate grounds for profiling. References: 132
https://gdpr.eu/article-21-right-to-object/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations-2/guide-to-data-protection/guide- to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/individual-rights/right-to-object/

질문 # 153
Which of the following is an accurate statement regarding the "one-stop-shop" mechanism of the GDPR?

A. It can result in several lead supervisory authorities in the EU assuming competence over the same data processing activities of an organization.
B. It applies only to direct enforcement of data protection supervisory authorities (e.g.. finding a breach), but not to initiating or engaging m court proceedings
C. It gives competence to the lead supervisory authority to address privacy issues derived from processes carried out by public authorities established in different countries.
D. It allows supervisory authorities concerned (other than the lead supervisory authority) to act against organizations m exceptional cases even if they do not have any type of establishment in the Member State of the respective authority.

정답：D

설명：
The "one-stop-shop" mechanism of the GDPR is a system of co-operation and consistency procedures that aims to ensure that the data protection regulation is enforced uniformly across all member states and calls on the data protection authorities (DPAs) across member states to co-operate with each other and the Commission to ensure consistent application of the GDPR1. The "one-stop-shop" mechanism applies to organisations that conduct cross-border data processing, which means that they process personal data in the context of the activities of their establishments in more than one member state, or that they target or monitor data subjects in more than one member state1. Under the "one-stop-shop" mechanism, such organisations will have to deal primarily with the DPA of the member state where they have their main establishment or their single establishment in the EU, which will act as their lead supervisory authority for all matters related to their cross-border data processing1. The lead supervisory authority will co-ordinate with other concerned supervisory authorities, which are the DPAs of the member states where the data subjects are affected by the data processing1. The lead supervisory authority will have the competence to adopt binding decisions regarding measures to ensure compliance with the GDPR, such as imposing administrative fines or ordering the suspension of data flows1. However, the "one-stop-shop" mechanism does not prevent the concerned supervisory authorities from acting against organisations in exceptional cases, even if they do not have any type of establishment in the member state of the respective authority1. These exceptional cases include the following situations2:
When a complaint is lodged with a supervisory authority, the subject matter relates only to an establishment in its member state or substantially affects data subjects only in its member state; When a supervisory authority is addressing a possible infringement related to the offering of goods or services to data subjects in its member state or to the monitoring of their behaviour in its member state; When a supervisory authority adopts provisional measures intended to produce legal effects in its own member state; When an urgent need to act arises in order to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects. In these cases, the concerned supervisory authority will inform the lead supervisory authority and the other concerned supervisory authorities, and will try to reach a consensus on the action to be taken2. If no consensus is reached, the consistency mechanism will apply, which involves the intervention of the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) to issue a binding decision on the matter2. Therefore, option D is the correct answer. Reference: Art. 60 GDPR - Cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities concerned, Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)

질문 # 154
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
You have just been hired by a toy manufacturer based in Hong Kong. The company sells a broad range of dolls, action figures and plush toys that can be found internationally in a wide variety of retail stores. Although the manufacturer has no offices outside Hong Kong and in fact does not employ any staff outside Hong Kong, it has entered into a number of local distribution contracts. The toys produced by the company can be found in all popular toy stores throughout Europe, the United States and Asia. A large portion of the company's revenue is due to international sales.
The company now wishes to launch a new range of connected toys, ones that can talk and interact with children. The CEO of the company is touting these toys as the next big thing, due to the increased possibilities offered: The figures can answer children's Questions: on various subjects, such as mathematical calculations or the weather. Each figure is equipped with a microphone and speaker and can connect to any smartphone or tablet via Bluetooth. Any mobile device within a 10-meter radius can connect to the toys via Bluetooth as well. The figures can also be associated with other figures (from the same manufacturer) and interact with each other for an enhanced play experience.
When a child asks the toy a QUESTION, the request is sent to the cloud for analysis, and the answer is generated on cloud servers and sent back to the figure. The answer is given through the figure's integrated speakers, making it appear as though that the toy is actually responding to the child's QUESTION. The packaging of the toy does not provide technical details on how this works, nor does it mention that this feature requires an internet connection. The necessary data processing for this has been outsourced to a data center located in South Africa. However, your company has not yet revised its consumer-facing privacy policy to indicate this.
In parallel, the company is planning to introduce a new range of game systems through which consumers can play the characters they acquire in the course of playing the game. The system will come bundled with a portal that includes a Near-Field Communications (NFC) reader. This device will read an RFID tag in the action figure, making the figure come to life onscreen. Each character has its own stock features and abilities, but it is also possible to earn additional ones by accomplishing game goals. The only information stored in the tag relates to the figures' abilities. It is easy to switch characters during the game, and it is possible to bring the figure to locations outside of the home and have the character's abilities remain intact.
To ensure GDPR compliance, what should be the company's position on the issue of consent?

A. Written authorization attesting to the responsible use of children's data would need to be obtained from the supervisory authority.
B. Consent for data collection is implied through the parent's purchase of the action figure for the child.
C. Parental consent for a child's use of the action figures would have to be obtained before any data could be collected.
D. The child, as the user of the action figure, can provide consent himself, as long as no information is shared for marketing purposes.

정답：C

설명：
According to Article 8 of the GDPR, where the processing of personal data is based on consent and the offer of an information society service (ISS) is directly made to a child, the processing is lawful only if the child is at least 16 years old, or if the consent is given or authorised by the holder of parental responsibility over the child. The GDPR allows EU member states to lower the age threshold to a minimum of 13 years. The data controller must make reasonable efforts to verify that the consent is given or authorised by the holder of parental responsibility, taking into account available technology. An ISS is any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient of services. Examples of ISS include online marketplaces, social media platforms, and online games.
In this scenario, the company is offering an ISS to children, as the connected toys can talk and interact with children via the internet. The company is also processing personal data of the children, such as their voice, questions, preferences, and location. Therefore, the company must obtain parental consent for the use of the action figures before any data can be collected, unless the child is above the age threshold set by the relevant EU member state. The company must also inform the parents and the children about the nature and purpose of the data processing, the data transfers to South Africa, and the rights of the data subjects. The company must also ensure that the data processing is fair, lawful, transparent, and in accordance with the data protection principles and the children's best interests.
The other options are incorrect because:
A) The child cannot provide consent himself, regardless of the purpose of the data processing, unless he is above the age threshold set by the relevant EU member state. The GDPR does not make any distinction between data processing for marketing or non-marketing purposes when it comes to children's consent.
B) The company does not need to obtain written authorization from the supervisory authority to process children's data, as long as it complies with the GDPR requirements and obtains parental consent. The supervisory authority is the independent public authority responsible for monitoring the application of the GDPR in each EU member state, and it can intervene only in cases of non-compliance or complaints.
C) Consent for data collection cannot be implied through the parent's purchase of the action figure for the child. The GDPR requires that consent must be freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous, and that it must be expressed by a clear affirmative action. The purchase of a product does not meet these criteria, and it does not indicate the parent's agreement to the data processing. Moreover, the packaging of the toy does not provide sufficient information about the data processing, nor does it mention that an internet connection is required.

질문 # 155
What should a controller do after a data subject opts out of a direct marketing activity?

A. Without undue delay, provide information to the data subject on the action that will be taken.
B. Take reasonable steps to inform third-party recipients that the data subject's personal data should be deleted and no longer processed.
C. Without exception, securely delete all personal data relating to the data subject.
D. Refrain from processing personal data relating to the data subject for the relevant type of communication.

정답：D

질문 # 156
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.
What would be the most appropriate response to Jacks data subject access request?

A. The company should not provide any information, as the company is headquartered outside of the EU.
B. The company should cite the need for an extension, and agree to provide the information requested in Jack's original DSAR within a period of 3 months.
C. The company should provide all requested information except for the emails, as they are excluded from data access request requirements under the GDPR.
D. The company should decline to provide any information, as the amount of information requested is too excessive to provide in one month.

정답：D

설명：
According to Article 15 of the GDPR, data subjects have the right to access and receive a copy of their personal data, and other supplementary information, from the data controller1. However, this right is not absolute and may be subject to limitations or restrictions. One of the grounds for refusing or limiting a data subject access request (DSAR) is when the request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, in particular because of its repetitive character1. In such cases, the controller may either charge a reasonable fee, taking into account the administrative costs of providing the information, or refuse to act on the request1. The controller must inform the data subject of the reasons for not taking action and of the possibility of lodging a complaint with a supervisory authority or seeking a judicial remedy1.
In this scenario, Jack's DSAR is likely to be considered excessive, as he requests a copy of all personal data, including internal emails, that were sent or received by him or where he is directly or indirectly identifiable from the contents. This is a very broad and vague request, which would require the company to search and review a large amount of information, and potentially disclose confidential or sensitive data about other employees or third parties. The company has already contacted Jack, asking him to be more specific about what information he requires, but he refused to narrow the scope of his request. Therefore, the company has a valid reason to decline to provide any information, as the amount of information requested is too excessive to provide in one month, which is the general time limit for responding to a DSAR under the GDPR1. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.
Option A is incorrect because the company's headquarters location is irrelevant for the purpose of the DSAR, as 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 not2. The company has an establishment in Ireland, where Jack worked, and therefore is subject to the GDPR.
Option C is incorrect because the company cannot agree to provide the information requested in Jack's original DSAR within a period of 3 months, as this would violate the data subject's right of access and the principle of accountability under the GDPR. The company can only extend the time limit to respond to a DSAR by a further two months if the request is complex or if the controller receives a number of requests from the same data subject1. However, the company must inform the data subject of any such extension within one month of receipt of the request, together with the reasons for the delay1. In this case, the company has not done so, and has instead asked Jack to be more specific about his request.
Option D is incorrect because the company cannot provide all requested information except for the emails, as this would not comply with the data subject's right of access and the principle of transparency under the GDPR. The company must provide the data subject with a copy of the personal data undergoing processing, unless this adversely affects the rights and freedoms of others1. The emails are part of the personal data undergoing processing, and the company cannot exclude them from the DSAR without a valid reason. The company must also provide the data subject with the following supplementary information, unless the data subject already has it1:
the purposes of the processing;
the categories of personal data concerned;
the recipients or categories of recipients to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed, in particular recipients in third countries or international organisations; where possible, the envisaged period for which the personal data will be stored, or, if not possible, the criteria used to determine that period; the existence of the right to request from the controller rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of processing of personal data concerning the data subject or to object to such processing; the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority; where the personal data are not collected from the data subject, any available information as to their source; the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of such processing for the data subject.
Reference:
Right of access
Territorial scope

질문 # 157
......

우리ExamPassdump 사이트에IAPP CIPP-E관련자료의 일부 문제와 답 등 문제들을 제공함으로 여러분은 무료로 다운받아 체험해보실 수 있습니다. 여러분은 이것이야 말로 알맞춤이고, 전면적인 여러분이 지금까지 갖고 싶었던 문제집이라는 것을 느끼게 됩니다.

CIPP-E 100％시험패스 덤프: https://www.exampassdump.com/CIPP-E_valid-braindumps.html

Menu

Login/Register

James Davis James Davis

Biography

IAPP CIPP-E인증시험덤프문제 & CIPP-E 100％시험패스덤프

CIPP-E 100％시험패스 덤프 & CIPP-E퍼펙트 최신 덤프자료

최신 Certified Information Privacy Professional CIPP-E 무료샘플문제 (Q152-Q157):

দেওয়ান একাডেমী সম্পর্কিত

নেভিগেশন

সাপোর্ট সেন্টার

01976444302

Email

সোশাল লিঙ্ক