CIPP-E LATEST TEST PREPARATION, LATEST CIPP-E EXAM CAMP

CIPP-E Latest Test Preparation, Latest CIPP-E Exam Camp

CIPP-E Latest Test Preparation, Latest CIPP-E Exam Camp

Blog Article

Tags: CIPP-E Latest Test Preparation, Latest CIPP-E Exam Camp, Valid CIPP-E Test Blueprint, New CIPP-E Dumps Files, Valid CIPP-E Exam Testking

P.S. Free 2025 IAPP CIPP-E dumps are available on Google Drive shared by VCEEngine: https://drive.google.com/open?id=19gTkHuXWjEbGI3WUcnP5QbDiP-CY7ZDi

It is our aspiration to help candidates get certification in their first try with our latest CIPP-E exam prep and valid pass guide. We know the difficulty of CIPP-E real exam so our IT experts written the best quality exam answers for our customers who didn't get good result. By using our CIPP-E pass review, you will grasp the overall key points of the test content and solve the difficult questions easier.

The CIPP-E Exam covers key topics such as the European privacy framework, data protection principles, and the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation). Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) certification program provides individuals with the necessary skills and knowledge to navigate the complex and ever-changing landscape of privacy laws and regulations in Europe. The CIPP-E exam not only provides individuals with a competitive advantage in their careers, but it also demonstrates their commitment to upholding the highest standards of privacy and data protection.

The CIPP/E certification is an excellent way for privacy professionals to demonstrate their expertise and commitment to data protection to their employers, clients, and peers. It is also an opportunity to network with other privacy professionals and stay up-to-date with the latest developments in European data protection laws and regulations.

>> CIPP-E Latest Test Preparation <<

CIPP-E Latest Test Preparation - Pass Guaranteed Quiz First-grade IAPP Latest CIPP-E Exam Camp

The Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) (CIPP-E) certification exam is one of the hottest and most industrial-recognized credentials that has been inspiring beginners and experienced professionals since its beginning. With the Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) (CIPP-E) certification exam successful candidates can gain a range of benefits which include career advancement, higher earning potential, industrial recognition of skills and job security, and more career personal and professional growth.

IAPP Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe (CIPP/E) Sample Questions (Q61-Q66):

NEW QUESTION # 61
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.
What is the main problem with the 24/7 camera monitoring?

  • A. It must not be operated during non-business hours and employee holidays.
  • B. It must first be approved by the trade union and then granted a license from the national DPA.
  • C. It may accidentally film third parties whose consent is required for monitoring.
  • D. It has no valid legal basis to be implemented in the context of Gentle Hedgehog's business.

Answer: D

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 main problem with the 24/7 camera monitoring is that it has no valid legal basis to be implemented in the context of Gentle Hedgehog's business. This option is the most consistent with the GDPR's principles and requirements, as it:
Is not based on a valid legal ground for the processing of personal data, as it does not rely on the legitimate interests of the employer, the performance of a contract with the employee, or the compliance with a legal obligation. The legitimate interests of the employer to ensure the productivity, quality and security of the work performed by the employees must be balanced with the rights and freedoms of the employees, and the 24/7 camera monitoring is likely to be disproportionate and intrusive, especially if it covers non-work-related activities and communications. The performance of a contract with the employee does not justify the 24/7 camera monitoring, as it is not necessary for the fulfilment of the contractual obligations of the employee or the employer. The compliance with a legal obligation does not apply to the 24/7 camera monitoring, as there is no specific law or regulation that requires such a measure in the context of Gentle Hedgehog's business.
Is not limited to what is necessary for the purposes of the monitoring, as it involves the collection and processing of excessive and irrelevant personal data, such as camera and microphone monitoring, which go beyond the scope of the work performed by the employees, and intrude into their private or personal sphere. The 24/7 camera monitoring is also likely to capture personal data of third parties, such as customers, suppliers or visitors, whose consent is required for the monitoring, and whose rights and freedoms may be affected by the processing.
Is not transparent to the employees, as it does not inform them of the monitoring and its precise scope, and does not give them the opportunity to object or opt out of the monitoring. The monitoring is invisible by default, which means that the employees are not aware of when and how they are being monitored, and what personal data are being collected and processed. The so-called Transparent Mode, which regularly and conspicuously notifies all users about the monitoring and its precise scope, is also insufficient, as it does not provide the employees with a clear and comprehensive information notice, nor with a valid and specific consent form, as required by the GDPR.
Involves 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. The facial recognition technology used by the monitoring system is a form of biometric data processing, which is prohibited by the GDPR, unless the data subject has given explicit consent, or the processing is necessary 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 processing is necessary for reasons of substantial public interest. None of these exceptions apply to the scenario, as the facial recognition technology is not used for any of these purposes, but rather for verifying the identity of the employees each time they log in. The camera and microphone monitoring may also capture personal data revealing political opinions or trade union membership, which are also special categories of personal data, and which are not relevant or proportionate for the purposes of the monitoring.
Involves 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 monitoring data, including the facial recognition data, are securely stored in Microsoft Azure cloud servers operated by Sauron Eye, which are physically located in France. However, Sauron Eye is a Chinese vendor of employee surveillance software, whose European headquarters is in Germany. This means that the monitoring data may be accessed or transferred by Sauron Eye to its parent company or other affiliates in China, which is a third country that does not ensure an adequate level of data protection, according to the European Commission. The transfer of personal data to China 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. However, the scenario does not indicate that any of these safeguards or remedies are in place, and therefore the transfer of personal data to China may violate the GDPR.
The other options listed in the question are not the main problem with the 24/7 camera monitoring, as they:
Are not directly related to the GDPR's principles and requirements, but rather to the national laws and regulations of the member states, which may vary depending on the specific context and circumstances of the monitoring. The GDPR does not specify a precise time limit for the operation of the camera monitoring, but leaves it to the national laws and regulations of the member states to determine the appropriate conditions and safeguards for the monitoring, taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, as well as the risks for the rights and freedoms of data subjects. The GDPR also does not require the approval of the trade union or the license from the national DPA for the camera monitoring, but leaves it to the national laws and regulations of the member states to establish the appropriate procedures and mechanisms for the consultation and involvement of the relevant stakeholders, such as the employees, the trade unions, the works councils, the DPAs or the courts.
Are not the main problem with the 24/7 camera monitoring, but rather the consequences or the implications of the main problem, which is the lack of a valid legal basis for the monitoring. The operation of the camera monitoring during non-business hours and employee holidays, or the accidental filming of third parties whose consent is required for the monitoring, are not the main problem, but rather the result of the main problem, which is the excessive and disproportionate collection and processing of personal data, which go beyond the scope of the work performed by the employees, and intrude into their private or personal sphere. The approval of the trade union or the license from the national DPA are not the main problem, but rather the potential solutions or remedies for the main problem, which is the absence of transparency and accountability for the monitoring, which do not inform the employees of the monitoring and its precise scope, and do not give them the opportunity to object or opt out of the monitoring.
Reference:
GDPR, Articles 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]


NEW QUESTION # 62
A well-known video production company, based in Spain but specializing in documentaries filmed worldwide, has just finished recording several hours of footage featuring senior citizens in the streets of Madrid. Under what condition would the company NOT be required to obtain the consent of everyone whose image they use for their documentary?

  • A. If the company's status as a documentary provider allows it to claim legitimate interest.
  • B. If obtaining consent is deemed to involve disproportionate effort.
  • C. If the company limits the footage to data subjects solely of legal age.
  • D. If obtaining consent is deemed voluntary by local legislation.

Answer: A

Explanation:
According to the GDPR, consent is one of the six lawful bases for processing personal data, but not the only one. The other five are: contract, legal obligation, vital interests, public task and legitimate interests. Legitimate interests can be invoked by controllers who process personal data for their own benefit or for the benefit of third parties, as long as such processing does not override the rights and freedoms of the data subjects, especially if they are children. The GDPR also recognizes that processing personal data for journalistic purposes or the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression may be necessary for the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and information, which is a legitimate interest. Therefore, the company may not need to obtain the consent of everyone whose image they use for their documentary, if they can demonstrate that their processing is necessary for the purposes of their journalistic, artistic or literary expression, and that they have taken into account the reasonable expectations of the data subjects and the potential impact on their privacy. The company should also comply with any relevant national laws or codes of conduct that may apply to such processing. Reference:
GDPR, Article 6(1)(a)-(f)
GDPR, Recital 47
GDPR, Article 85


NEW QUESTION # 63
What is the consequence if a processor makes an independent decision regarding the purposes and means of processing it carries out on behalf of a controller?

  • A. The controller will be required to demonstrate that the unauthorized processing negatively affected one or more of the parties involved
  • B. The controller will be liable to pay an administrative fine
  • C. The processor will be liable to pay compensation to affected data subjects
  • D. The processor will be considered to be a controller in respect of the processing concerned

Answer: C

Explanation:
Explanation/Reference: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection- regulation-gdpr/key-definitions/controllers-and-processors/


NEW QUESTION # 64
A company would like to implement CCTV monitoring in its offices for safety and security purposes. Which of the following would be the best legal basis for the company to rely upon?

  • A. Legitimate interest.
  • B. Individual consent
  • C. Public interest.
  • D. Exercise of pubic authority.

Answer: C


NEW QUESTION # 65
SCENARIO - Please use the following to answer the next question:
It has been a tough season for the Spanish Handball League, with acts of violence and racism having increased exponentially during their last few matches.
In order to address this situation, the Spanish Minister of Sports, in conjunction with the National Handball League Association, issued an Administrative Order (the "Act") obliging all the professional clubs to install a fingerprint-reading system for accessing some areas of the sports halls, primarily the ones directly behind the goalkeepers. The rest of the areas would retain the current access system, which allows any spectators access as long as they hold valid tickets.
The Act named a selected hardware and software provider, New Digital Finger, Ltd., for the creation of the new fingerprint system. Additionally, it stipulated that any of the professional clubs that failed to install this system within a two-year period would face fines under the Act.
The Murla HB Club was the first to install the new system, renting the New Digital Finger hardware and software. Immediately afterward, the Murla HB Club automatically renewed current supporters' subscriptions, while introducing a new contractual clause requiring supporters to access specific areas of the hall through the new fingerprint reading system installed at the gates.
After the first match hosted by the Murla HB Club, a local supporter submitted a complaint to the club and to the Spanish Data Protection Authority (the AEPD), claiming that the new access system violates EU data protection laws. Having been notified by the AEPD of the upcoming investigation regarding this complaint, the Murla HB Club immediately carried out a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA), the conclusions of which stated that the new access system did not pose any high risks to data subjects' privacy rights.
The Murla HB Club should have carried out a DPIA before the installation of the new access system and at what other time?

  • A. Periodically, when new risks were foreseen.
  • B. At the end of every match of the season.
  • C. After the complaint of the supporter.
  • D. After the AEPD notification of the investigation.

Answer: A

Explanation:
A DPIA is not a one-time activity. While it's crucial to conduct a DPIA before implementing a new system that processes personal data (like the fingerprint system), the GDPR requires organizations to review and update their DPIAs periodically, especially when there are changes that might affect the risk to data subjects.
Here's why the other options are incorrect:
A . After the complaint of the supporter: While a complaint might trigger a review of the processing, the DPIA should have been done proactively before any issues arose.
C . At the end of every match of the season: This frequency is excessive and doesn't align with the idea of assessing risks when changes occur.
D . After the AEPD notification of the investigation: Similar to option A, this is reactive rather than proactive.
Reference:
GDPR Article 35 - Data protection impact assessment
IAPP CIPP/E textbook, Chapter 4: Accountability and Data Governance (specifically, sections on DPIAs and ongoing review) WP29 Guidelines on Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)


NEW QUESTION # 66
......

Laziness will ruin your life one day. It is time to have a change now. Although we all love cozy life, we must work hard to create our own value. Then our CIPP-E training materials will help you overcome your laziness. Study is the best way to enrich your life. On one hand, you may learn the newest technologies in the field with our CIPP-E Study Guide to help you better adapt to your work, and on the other hand, you will pass the CIPP-E exam and achieve the certification which is the symbol of competence.

Latest CIPP-E Exam Camp: https://www.vceengine.com/CIPP-E-vce-test-engine.html

P.S. Free 2025 IAPP CIPP-E dumps are available on Google Drive shared by VCEEngine: https://drive.google.com/open?id=19gTkHuXWjEbGI3WUcnP5QbDiP-CY7ZDi

Report this page