Ham­burg Com­mis­sio­ner for Data Pro­tec­tion and Free­dom of Infor­ma­ti­on: Data breach noti­fi­ca­ti­ons pur­su­ant to Art. 33 GDPR

On Novem­ber 15, 2018, the Ham­burg Com­mis­sio­ner for Data Pro­tec­tion and Free­dom of Infor­ma­ti­on issued a Gui­dance on data breach noti­fi­ca­ti­ons accor­ding to Art. 33 GDPR published, which pro­vi­des some cla­ri­fi­ca­ti­ons on a few points:

  • not every data pro­tec­tion breach, but in prin­ci­ple only Data secu­ri­ty brea­ches are cover­ed (examp­les are “hack­ing and data theft as well as SQL gaps, bugs in the web ser­ver, lost USB sticks or lap­tops, unlawful trans­mis­si­on as well as the break-in into ser­ver rooms, which are accom­pa­nied by the loss or des­truc­tion of hard­ware or the rea­ding out of data car­ri­ers”); nevert­hel­ess, also about acci­den­tal mis­di­rec­tion of an e‑mail is recorded;
  • an inf­rin­ge­ment due to inter­rup­ti­on of avai­la­bi­li­ty “pre­sup­po­ses a lon­ger dura­ti­on and can be cau­sed, for exam­p­le, by a power outa­ge or a deni­al-of-ser­vice attack,” and “Only unin­ten­tio­nal bar­riers to access [are] data brea­ches within the mea­ning of Artic­le 33 GDPR.”
  • the­re must be a Inju­ry Suc­cess If no unaut­ho­ri­zed access has occur­red despi­te the exi­stence of a secu­ri­ty gap, the­re is no obli­ga­ti­on to report it.

For the assess­ment of risk as a result of the breach and the que­sti­on of when (the dead­line-trig­ge­ring) “know­ledge” of the breach exists, the Com­mis­sio­ner refers to the Euro­pean Data Pro­tec­tion Board paper on data breach noti­fi­ca­ti­ons;

Aut­ho­ri­ty

Area

Topics

Rela­ted articles

Sub­scri­be