Organisations and regulators must conduct SSC analyses on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the protection of state access to data complies with EU standards. Each company is a separate responsible owner because it processes personal data for its own purposes and makes its own decisions. 2) You send personal data to a recipient to whom the RGPD does not apply. This generally applies to beneficiaries in a country outside the EEA. You should consider (especially if you are a controller) direct and indirect transfers (redirects) for both current and future transfers. A direct transfer is made when the recipient of the information with which the exporter issues a contract is established outside the EEA. An indirect transfer would take place if the beneficiary of the contract is based in the EEA, but hires other processors or subcontractors outside the EEA, including the group companies. Although it is central to data protection – which is mentioned 15 times in the RGPD – and can contribute to the protection of privacy and the security of personal data, pseudonymization has its limits, which is why the RGPD also mentions encryption. This decision is a finding of the Commission that the legal framework in force in that country, territory, sector or international organisation provides « adequate » protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals for their personal data. The rapid development of new technologies and their rapid integration into the business model have changed the way businesses operate and make it convenient and inexpensive to process, exchange and even store personal data in different locations. However, while pseudonymization allows anyone with access to the data to view part of the record, encryption only allows authorized users to access the full record. The transfer does not mean the same thing as transit. When personal data is transmitted only electronically by a non-EEA country, but the transfer is actually made from one EEA country to another EEA country, it is not a limited transfer.
The legal framework for data transfers to a non-EU country is changing. Because cross-border data transmission is just as important for companies exporting data as it is for companies that import data (for example. B organisations based in Albania), a brief guide on viable options for this transmission is of great interest. The EDPB has presented guidelines on codes of conduct. It will contain specific guidelines for the use of codes as a mechanism for facilitating timely international transfers. It has so far held responsible for two standard contractual clauses for the transfer of data from those responsible for processing in the EU to those responsible for processing outside the EU or the European Economic Area (EEA). In July 2020, the ECJ (European Court of Justice) declared that the EU-US data protection shield – used by organisations for the transatlantic transmission of personal data – was no longer valid. The transfer of personal data is defined as limited if: In the negative, you can make the transfer without personal data.