CIPP-US Exam QuestionsBrowse all questions from this exam

CIPP-US Exam - Question 19


SCENARIO -

Please use the following to answer the next question:

A US-based startup company is selling a new gaming application. One day, the CEO of the company receives an urgent letter from a prominent EU-based retail partner. Triggered by an unresolved complaint lodged by an EU resident, the letter describes an ongoing investigation by a supervisory authority into the retailer’s data handling practices.

The complainant accuses the retailer of improperly disclosing her personal data, without consent, to parties in the United States. Further, the complainant accuses the EU-based retailer of failing to respond to her withdrawal of consent and request for erasure of her personal data. Your organization, the US-based startup company, was never informed of this request for erasure by the EU-based retail partner. The supervisory authority investigating the complaint has threatened the suspension of data flows if the parties involved do not cooperate with the investigation. The letter closes with an urgent request: “Please act immediately by identifying all personal data received from our company.”

This is an important partnership. Company executives know that its biggest fans come from Western Europe; and this retailer is primarily responsible for the startup’s rapid market penetration.

As the Company’s data privacy leader, you are sensitive to the criticality of the relationship with the retailer.

At this stage of the investigation, what should the data privacy leader review first?

Show Answer
Correct Answer: AD

In the scenario presented, a US-based startup company needs to respond urgently to an investigation concerning the handling of personal data received from an EU-based retail partner. The first step the data privacy leader should take is to review available data flow diagrams. This will help identify all personal data received from the EU-based retailer, fulfilling the urgent request and ensuring compliance with the investigation. Understanding the data flows will provide the necessary context to evaluate further actions, including responding to the regulatory requirements and the specific complaint. Reviewing prevailing regulation or company policies can follow once the precise data handling practices are understood.

Discussion

5 comments
Sign in to comment
jjjrbm
Nov 4, 2023

B makes sense as well. Several of the options are reasonable

smp175Option: D
Jul 5, 2023

Does anyone have any additional information on why the answer is D and not A? It seems that identifying categories of PII received would be fine, and therefore reviewing data flows would be the first step. Is it because the prompt specifically states "identifying all personal data", which implies such data would not be anonymized, and therefore prevailing regulation should be reviewed before providing such PII?

PrivacyICUOption: D
Sep 25, 2023

D makes sense because you want to understand the law before you apply it to your case.

Buki007Option: D
Jan 13, 2024

The answer is D. If you look at A, what if we review the Data flows and later find out that the regulation does not apply to us?

BhimeshOption: D
Apr 8, 2024

Should be D. Prevailing regulation on this subject