The core principle of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 regarding the handling of personal data by cloud service providers (CSPs) is to ensure that the CSP acts as a data processor on behalf of the data controller. This means the CSP should only process personal data according to the documented instructions of the data controller and not use it for their own purposes, such as marketing or profiling, unless explicitly authorized. Clause 7.2.1, “Use of personal data by the cloud service provider,” directly addresses this by requiring the CSP to process personal data only on behalf of the customer (data controller) and in accordance with the customer’s documented instructions. This includes not using personal data for the CSP’s own purposes. Therefore, the most accurate statement reflects this fundamental obligation of the CSP to act solely as a processor under the direction of the controller, without independent use of the data. The other options either misrepresent the CSP’s role, suggest unauthorized data usage, or focus on aspects not central to the core processing obligation.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when personal data is processed on behalf of a data controller. Specifically, it addresses the CSP’s obligations regarding data subject rights, such as the right to access, rectification, and erasure, when these rights are exercised by individuals. ISO/IEC 27018:2019, in conjunction with relevant data protection regulations like the GDPR, places a significant onus on the CSP to facilitate the data controller’s ability to meet these requests. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should provide mechanisms and support to enable the data controller to fulfill its obligations. This includes having processes in place to handle requests for data modification, deletion, or disclosure. The CSP must ensure that its own operational controls and contractual agreements with the data controller are structured to allow for the timely and accurate execution of such data subject rights. Therefore, the CSP’s direct engagement in assisting the data controller with data subject requests, by providing the necessary technical and organizational means, is paramount. This is distinct from the CSP acting as a data controller itself, which is not the case in this scenario. The CSP’s role is to support the controller’s compliance.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving personal data occurs. The standard places specific obligations on the CSP to inform the data controller and, in certain circumstances, the affected individuals. Clause 7.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27018:2019, titled “Notification of a breach of personal data,” outlines these responsibilities. It emphasizes that the CSP should notify the data controller without undue delay upon becoming aware of a breach. Furthermore, it states that the CSP should assist the data controller in notifying the affected individuals, if the data controller requests such assistance and if the breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. The question scenario describes a situation where a CSP detects a breach affecting personal data of individuals in the EU, processed on behalf of a data controller. The breach is assessed as having a high probability of causing significant distress and potential financial harm to the affected individuals. In this context, the CSP’s primary obligation is to facilitate the notification process to the data controller, enabling them to fulfill their own obligations under regulations like the GDPR. The CSP should also be prepared to assist the data controller in notifying the individuals, as per the standard’s guidance. Therefore, the most appropriate action for the CSP, aligning with the spirit and letter of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 and relevant data protection laws, is to inform the data controller promptly and offer assistance in notifying the affected individuals, recognizing the high-risk nature of the breach.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, particularly when the data is processed on behalf of a customer. The standard emphasizes transparency and notification. Clause 8.3.2, “Notification of a breach of personal data,” mandates that the CSP shall notify the customer without undue delay upon becoming aware of a breach of personal data. This notification should include sufficient information to enable the customer to meet their own notification obligations to supervisory authorities and data subjects, as required by relevant data protection regulations like the GDPR. Therefore, the CSP’s primary obligation is to inform the customer, who then typically assumes the responsibility for further actions, including direct communication with affected individuals and regulatory bodies, unless otherwise contractually agreed. The other options represent either a direct assumption of the customer’s role, an incomplete action, or an action that bypasses the primary contractual and regulatory notification chain.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when handling personal data on behalf of a customer, particularly in the context of data subject rights and the CSP’s role in facilitating those rights. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should not use personal data for its own purposes without consent and must assist the customer in responding to data subject requests. When a data subject requests the deletion of their personal data, the CSP, as the processor of that data, has a direct obligation to facilitate this deletion. This involves not just removing the data from active systems but also ensuring its secure disposal or anonymization, in line with the customer’s instructions and applicable data protection regulations like GDPR. The CSP’s contractual obligations and technical capabilities are crucial here. The standard requires the CSP to provide mechanisms or support to enable the customer to fulfill data subject requests. Therefore, the CSP’s primary responsibility is to enable the customer to comply with the deletion request, which means the CSP must have processes in place to securely delete or anonymize the data upon the customer’s instruction. The CSP cannot simply ignore the request or pass the buck entirely to the customer without providing the necessary technical means to execute the deletion. The explanation of the correct approach involves understanding the shared responsibility model in cloud computing and the specific mandates of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 regarding data subject rights and processor obligations. It highlights the need for clear contractual agreements and robust technical controls to manage personal data effectively and ethically in the cloud environment, ensuring compliance with global data protection frameworks.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) in relation to data subject rights under ISO/IEC 27018:2019, particularly when acting as a data processor. The standard emphasizes the CSP’s role in assisting the customer (data controller) in fulfilling these rights. When a data subject requests the deletion of their personal data, the CSP, as the processor, must have mechanisms in place to facilitate this. This involves not just deleting the data from active systems but also ensuring its secure and permanent removal from backup and archival systems, subject to legal or regulatory retention requirements. The CSP’s contractual obligations and documented procedures are crucial for demonstrating compliance. Therefore, the most accurate response is that the CSP must ensure the permanent deletion of the personal data from all its systems, including backups and archives, in accordance with the customer’s instructions and any applicable legal obligations. This aligns with the standard’s intent to protect personal data throughout its lifecycle and to enable data controllers to meet their obligations. The other options represent either incomplete actions (e.g., only active systems) or misinterpretations of the CSP’s role (e.g., solely relying on the customer’s internal processes without CSP action, or assuming immediate deletion without considering retention policies).

The core of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 is to provide guidance for Public Cloud Service Providers (PCPs) on protecting Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in the cloud. A critical aspect is the PII processing and transfer outside the jurisdiction of data origin. The standard emphasizes that PCPs should not process PII on behalf of a customer in a way that would contravene the customer’s obligations under applicable data protection laws. When PII is transferred internationally, the PCP must ensure that the transfer is conducted in accordance with the requirements of the applicable data protection laws, which often mandate specific safeguards. These safeguards can include contractual clauses, binding corporate rules, or other mechanisms recognized by the relevant data protection authorities. The standard also requires PCPs to inform customers about any transfers of PII to countries that may not have equivalent levels of data protection. Therefore, a PCP’s responsibility extends to facilitating compliance with these international data transfer regulations, ensuring that the customer’s PII remains protected even when processed or stored in different geographical locations. This involves transparency, contractual agreements, and adherence to the principles of data minimization and purpose limitation throughout the data lifecycle.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when dealing with a data breach involving personal data processed on behalf of a customer. The standard, particularly Clause 6.3.2 (Management of information security incidents), mandates that CSPs must have established procedures for managing information security incidents. When a breach occurs, the CSP’s primary obligation is to inform the customer (the data controller) without undue delay. This notification is crucial for the customer to fulfill their own legal and regulatory obligations, such as those under GDPR (e.g., Article 33 for personal data breaches). The CSP’s role is to provide the necessary information to enable the customer to make informed decisions and take appropriate actions. Therefore, the most appropriate action for the CSP is to notify the customer promptly about the incident, detailing the nature of the breach, the categories and approximate number of data subjects concerned, and the likely consequences. The CSP should also assist the customer in their investigation and remediation efforts as contractually agreed upon. Direct notification to data subjects by the CSP, without the customer’s explicit instruction or consent, would overstep the CSP’s defined role as a data processor and potentially interfere with the customer’s data controller responsibilities and legal obligations. Similarly, solely focusing on internal remediation without informing the customer, or waiting for the customer to discover the breach, fails to meet the standard’s incident management requirements.

The core principle guiding the handling of personal data in the cloud, as per ISO/IEC 27018:2019, is the establishment of a clear and documented agreement between the data controller and the cloud service provider (CSP). This agreement, often referred to as a contract or a data processing agreement, is paramount for defining roles, responsibilities, and the scope of data processing activities. Specifically, it must address how the CSP will assist the data controller in fulfilling data subject rights, such as the right to access, rectification, erasure, and portability. This assistance is not merely a suggestion but a contractual obligation that ensures compliance with data protection regulations like the GDPR. The agreement should detail the procedures for responding to data subject requests, including timelines, information to be provided, and the mechanisms for verification. Furthermore, it should outline how the CSP will support the controller in managing data breaches, including notification requirements and forensic assistance. The standard emphasizes that the CSP acts as a data processor on behalf of the controller, and therefore, its actions must be dictated by the controller’s instructions and the terms of their agreement. Without this explicit contractual framework, the CSP cannot effectively or legally support the controller in meeting their data protection obligations, particularly those related to data subject rights and breach management. Therefore, the existence and content of this contractual arrangement are fundamental to demonstrating compliance.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) concerning the processing of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) on behalf of a Cloud Service Customer (CSC) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019. Specifically, the standard emphasizes that the CSP should not process PII for its own purposes or in a manner inconsistent with the CSC’s instructions and applicable data protection laws. When a CSP discovers a data breach involving PII it is processing, its primary obligation, as outlined in the standard and often mandated by regulations like the GDPR, is to notify the CSC promptly. This notification allows the CSC to fulfill its own legal obligations, which may include notifying data subjects and supervisory authorities. The CSP’s role is to facilitate the CSC’s response, not to independently manage the breach notification process for the PII it is merely processing. Therefore, informing the CSC about the breach is the immediate and most critical action.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, and the data subject is located in a jurisdiction with strict data protection laws, such as the GDPR. The standard, in conjunction with relevant privacy regulations, mandates specific actions by the CSP. When a CSP becomes aware of a PII breach, its primary obligation is to notify the relevant supervisory authority without undue delay, and where feasible, not later than 72 hours after having become aware of it, unless the personal data breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. Furthermore, if the breach is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the CSP must also communicate the personal data breach to the data subject without undue delay. This notification process is crucial for transparency and enabling data subjects to take protective measures. The explanation focuses on the CSP’s proactive role in initiating these notifications, rather than waiting for instructions from the data controller or assuming the controller will handle all aspects. It emphasizes the direct responsibility of the CSP to inform the supervisory authority and, under specific high-risk conditions, the affected individuals, aligning with the principles of accountability and timely breach management stipulated by both ISO/IEC 27018:2019 and data protection laws like the GDPR.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, particularly when the CSP is acting as a data processor. The standard emphasizes transparency and notification. Clause 7.2.3, “Notification of a breach of personal data,” mandates that the CSP shall notify the data controller without undue delay upon becoming aware of a breach of personal data. This notification should include sufficient information to enable the data controller to meet their own notification obligations under applicable data protection laws, such as the GDPR. The explanation of why other options are incorrect lies in misinterpreting the roles and responsibilities. Directly notifying the affected individuals (option b) bypasses the data controller’s primary responsibility and legal obligations. Attempting to rectify the breach without informing the controller (option c) violates the principle of transparency and may hinder the controller’s ability to assess the full impact and comply with their own legal duties. Waiting for the data controller to initiate an inquiry (option d) is a passive approach that contradicts the proactive notification requirement stipulated in the standard, especially given the potential for significant harm to individuals. The CSP’s role is to facilitate the controller’s response by providing timely and accurate information.

The core of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 is to provide guidance on the protection of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in public cloud computing environments. A critical aspect of this standard involves the responsibilities of cloud service providers (CSPs) when they act as data processors on behalf of data controllers. When a CSP is involved in data processing, they must adhere to specific requirements to ensure PII is handled securely and in accordance with applicable data protection laws. This includes implementing appropriate technical and organizational measures to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration, or destruction of PII. Furthermore, the standard emphasizes the importance of transparency and accountability. CSPs must inform data controllers about the sub-processing of PII and ensure that any sub-processors also meet the security and privacy obligations. The standard also addresses data breach notification, requiring CSPs to assist data controllers in fulfilling their notification duties to supervisory authorities and affected individuals. Therefore, the most accurate description of the CSP’s role in this context is that of a data processor, bound by contractual agreements and the principles outlined in ISO/IEC 27018:2019 to safeguard PII. This aligns with the standard’s objective of establishing a framework for protecting PII in the cloud, ensuring that CSPs act responsibly and ethically when handling sensitive personal data.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when handling personal data on behalf of a customer (the data controller). Specifically, it addresses the CSP’s obligations regarding data subject rights, such as the right to access, rectification, and erasure, when these rights are exercised by individuals whose data is processed in the cloud. ISO/IEC 27018:2019, in conjunction with relevant data protection regulations like the GDPR, places a significant onus on the CSP to facilitate the data controller’s ability to meet these obligations. This involves providing mechanisms and cooperation to enable the data controller to respond to data subject requests. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should not directly respond to data subjects but rather support the data controller in doing so. Therefore, the CSP’s role is to provide the necessary tools and information to the data controller, who remains ultimately accountable to the data subject. The correct approach involves the CSP cooperating with the data controller to fulfill these requests, which might include data retrieval, modification, or deletion processes within the cloud environment, all while maintaining the security and integrity of the data. This cooperative model ensures that the data controller can uphold their legal and ethical responsibilities to individuals whose personal data is entrusted to the cloud.

The core principle of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 regarding the handling of personal data in the cloud, particularly concerning data subject rights and the responsibilities of a cloud service provider (CSP) acting as a data processor, is to ensure that the CSP facilitates the data subject’s ability to exercise their rights as defined by applicable data protection laws. When a data subject requests the deletion of their personal data, and the CSP is acting as a processor on behalf of a controller, the CSP’s primary obligation is to act on the controller’s instructions. However, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, in conjunction with general data protection principles like those found in GDPR, emphasizes that the CSP must also have mechanisms to respond directly or indirectly to such requests when they are routed through them. Specifically, clause 6.3.2 of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 addresses the “Correction, deletion or blocking of personal data.” It mandates that the CSP shall implement appropriate controls to enable the controller to fulfill the data subject’s request. If the CSP receives a request directly, and it is within their operational capability and contractual scope to fulfill it without compromising the controller’s data or other contractual obligations, they should facilitate it. The most accurate approach for a CSP, when acting as a processor and receiving a direct deletion request from a data subject, is to acknowledge the request and promptly inform the data controller, providing them with the necessary information to fulfill the request. This ensures that the controller remains in control of the data and can verify the request’s validity and scope, while the CSP demonstrates its commitment to supporting data subject rights. The CSP should not unilaterally delete data without the controller’s instruction, as this could violate the controller’s data management policies or legal obligations. Therefore, the correct action is to escalate the request to the controller for instruction.

The core principle of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 concerning the handling of PII by cloud service providers (CSPs) is to ensure that PII is processed in accordance with the instructions of the data controller and that the CSP acts as a data processor. This standard, when applied in conjunction with relevant data protection regulations like the GDPR, mandates specific controls and responsibilities. A key aspect is the CSP’s obligation to assist the data controller in fulfilling data subject rights, such as the right to access, rectification, erasure, and data portability. This assistance is not merely a courtesy but a contractual and regulatory necessity. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should not use PII for its own purposes without explicit authorization or legal basis. Furthermore, it requires the CSP to implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to protect PII against unauthorized or unlawful processing and against accidental loss, destruction, or damage. When a data breach occurs, the CSP must notify the data controller promptly, enabling the controller to meet its own notification obligations to supervisory authorities and data subjects. The standard also addresses cross-border data transfers, requiring that PII transferred outside its original jurisdiction is protected by appropriate safeguards. Therefore, a CSP’s primary role is to facilitate the controller’s compliance, not to independently determine the processing of PII.

The core principle of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 regarding the handling of personal data by cloud service providers (CSPs) is to ensure that the CSP acts as a data processor on behalf of the data controller. This means the CSP should only process personal data according to the documented instructions of the data controller and should not use it for its own purposes or disclose it to unauthorized third parties without explicit consent or legal obligation. Clause 7.1.2, “Use of personal information,” directly addresses this by requiring the CSP to process personal data only for the purpose of providing services to the customer and in accordance with the customer’s documented instructions. This aligns with the broader data protection principles found in regulations like the GDPR, which emphasize lawful processing, purpose limitation, and data minimization. The CSP’s responsibility extends to ensuring that any sub-processors it engages also adhere to these same principles. Therefore, a CSP’s ability to independently use customer personal data for its own marketing or service improvement initiatives, without explicit consent or contractual agreement, would be a direct contravention of the standard’s intent and the foundational principles of data processing. The correct approach is to restrict the CSP’s use of personal data solely to the provision of services as instructed by the data controller.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, and the data subject is located in a jurisdiction with strict data protection laws, such as the GDPR. The standard, in conjunction with relevant privacy regulations, mandates that the CSP must inform the data controller without undue delay. The data controller then has the primary responsibility for notifying the supervisory authority and the data subjects. The CSP’s role is to provide the necessary information to enable the data controller to fulfill these obligations. Therefore, the immediate action for the CSP is to notify the data controller, not directly the data subjects or a supervisory authority, as the controller is the entity that has the direct relationship and legal obligation to those parties. The other options represent either premature actions (direct notification to data subjects or supervisory authority before informing the controller) or a misinterpretation of the CSP’s role in the notification chain.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 concerning the handling of Personal Data (PD) when a data breach occurs, particularly when the CSP is the data controller for the infrastructure. ISO/IEC 27018:2019, Clause 6.3.3 (Information security incident management) and Annex A.6.3.3 (Information security incident management) emphasize the need for a documented process for managing information security incidents. When a CSP acts as a data controller for the underlying cloud infrastructure and a security incident impacts PD, it is their responsibility to initiate and manage the incident response process. This includes detection, assessment, containment, eradication, recovery, and post-incident review. Crucially, the standard requires the CSP to inform the data subject (or the data controller acting on behalf of the data subject) about the incident in a timely manner, as per contractual agreements and relevant legal obligations. The scenario describes a breach affecting PD stored by a customer (data subject) on the CSP’s infrastructure. Since the CSP is the data controller for the infrastructure and detected the breach, it must initiate the incident response. The most appropriate action, aligning with the standard’s intent and common data protection regulations like GDPR (which ISO/IEC 27018:2019 complements), is for the CSP to manage the incident and notify the customer. The other options are less appropriate: delaying notification until the customer reports it is reactive and not proactive; assuming the customer will detect it is a failure of the CSP’s responsibility as a data controller for the infrastructure; and solely relying on the customer to manage the entire incident response bypasses the CSP’s obligations when they are the party detecting the breach on their own infrastructure. Therefore, the CSP must manage the incident and notify the customer.

The core principle of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 regarding the handling of personal data in cloud environments, particularly concerning data subject rights and the responsibilities of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) acting as a data processor, is to ensure that the CSP facilitates the data subject’s ability to exercise their rights as defined by applicable data protection laws. When a data subject requests the deletion of their personal data, and the CSP is acting as a processor, the CSP must comply with the instructions of the data controller (the customer organization). However, the standard also mandates that the CSP must inform the data controller of any such request. This notification is crucial for the data controller to fulfill their own obligations under data protection regulations, such as the GDPR, which grants data subjects the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’). The CSP’s role is to enable the data controller to meet these requirements. Therefore, the CSP should not unilaterally delete data without informing the controller, nor should it refuse the request if the controller has authorized it. The most appropriate action is to acknowledge the request and inform the data controller, allowing the controller to then direct the CSP to proceed with the deletion, thereby ensuring compliance with both the data subject’s rights and the controller-processor relationship. This aligns with the principles of accountability and transparency outlined in the standard.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, particularly when the PII is processed on behalf of a customer. The standard emphasizes that the CSP must notify the customer (the data controller) without undue delay. This notification is crucial for enabling the data controller to fulfill their own legal and regulatory obligations, such as those under GDPR or similar data protection laws, which often mandate timely breach notification to supervisory authorities and affected individuals. The CSP’s role is to provide the necessary information to facilitate the controller’s response. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to inform the customer promptly about the incident, detailing the nature of the breach and the PII involved, so that the customer can initiate their incident response procedures. Other options are less aligned with the CSP’s direct obligations and the collaborative nature of data protection in a cloud environment. For instance, directly notifying regulatory bodies without the controller’s explicit instruction or involvement might overstep the CSP’s defined role and could interfere with the controller’s established reporting channels and legal responsibilities. Similarly, waiting for the customer to discover the breach independently or focusing solely on internal remediation without informing the customer bypasses the critical communication loop required by the standard and data protection principles.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving personal data occurs. The standard, particularly in relation to Annex A controls and the overarching principles of data protection, emphasizes the CSP’s role in assisting the customer (data controller) in fulfilling their obligations. When a breach of personal data occurs, the CSP is obligated to inform the customer without undue delay. This notification is crucial for the customer to then assess the breach and, if necessary, notify the relevant supervisory authority and affected individuals as mandated by data protection regulations like the GDPR. The CSP’s role is to provide the necessary information and support to enable the customer to meet these legal requirements. Therefore, the immediate action required from the CSP is to notify the customer, facilitating the customer’s subsequent actions. Other options are either premature, outside the CSP’s direct responsibility in this initial phase, or misinterpret the sequence of events and responsibilities. For instance, directly notifying the supervisory authority is the customer’s primary responsibility, and while the CSP might assist, the initial notification from CSP to customer is the foundational step.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, particularly when the CSP is acting as a data processor on behalf of a data controller. The standard emphasizes transparency and cooperation. Clause 7.2.1 of ISO/IEC 27018:2019, titled “Notification of breaches of personal data,” outlines the CSP’s obligations. It states that the CSP should inform the data controller without undue delay when it becomes aware of a breach of personal data. This notification should include sufficient information to enable the data controller to meet its own notification obligations to supervisory authorities and data subjects, as required by applicable data protection laws (e.g., GDPR). The CSP’s role is to facilitate the controller’s response, not to directly notify data subjects or supervisory authorities unless specifically instructed or legally mandated to do so in a particular jurisdiction or contractual agreement. Therefore, the most appropriate action for the CSP is to promptly inform the data controller, providing all relevant details about the incident.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving personal data occurs. The standard, particularly in Clause 6.3.3 (Information security incident management), mandates that CSPs must have processes in place to respond to security incidents. When personal data is compromised, the CSP has a direct obligation to inform the data controller. This notification is crucial for the data controller to fulfill their own legal and regulatory obligations, such as those under GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) or similar data protection laws, which often require timely notification of data breaches to supervisory authorities and affected individuals. The CSP’s role is to provide the necessary information to enable the controller to make these decisions and take appropriate actions. Therefore, the immediate and direct notification to the data controller is the primary and most critical step for the CSP in such a scenario. Other actions, while important for remediation and investigation, are secondary to fulfilling this fundamental reporting duty to the entity that entrusted them with the data.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving Personally Identifiable Information (PII) occurs, particularly when the CSP is acting as a data processor on behalf of a data controller. The standard, in conjunction with relevant data protection regulations like GDPR, places specific obligations on the CSP. Clause 7.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27018:2019, titled “Notification of a personal data breach,” outlines the CSP’s role. While the ultimate notification to the data subject or supervisory authority typically falls to the data controller, the CSP has a duty to inform the controller without undue delay. This notification must include sufficient information for the controller to fulfill their own reporting obligations. The explanation of the correct approach involves understanding that the CSP’s primary obligation is to facilitate the controller’s compliance. This means providing timely and accurate details about the breach, including the nature of the PII affected, the approximate number of data subjects involved, the likely consequences, and the measures taken or proposed to be taken by the CSP. The other options represent either an overreach of the CSP’s direct responsibility (e.g., directly notifying data subjects without controller instruction), an underestimation of their obligation (e.g., only informing the controller if requested), or a misinterpretation of the shared responsibility model in cloud computing for data protection. The standard emphasizes a collaborative approach where the CSP supports the controller’s compliance framework.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 when a data breach involving personal data occurs. The standard, particularly in clauses related to incident management and notification, emphasizes the CSP’s role in assisting the customer (the data controller) in fulfilling their own legal and contractual obligations. This includes providing necessary information about the breach to enable the controller to notify affected individuals and relevant authorities, as mandated by regulations like the GDPR. The CSP is not directly responsible for the notification itself to the data subjects or supervisory authorities, as that remains the controller’s duty. However, the CSP’s obligation is to facilitate this by providing timely and accurate details of the incident. Therefore, the most accurate response is that the CSP must provide the customer with all necessary information to enable the customer to make the required notifications. The other options are incorrect because they either misattribute the primary notification responsibility to the CSP or suggest actions that are not the primary focus of the CSP’s obligation in such a scenario under the standard.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a cloud service provider (CSP) in relation to personal data processed on behalf of a customer, specifically concerning data subject rights and the CSP’s role in facilitating these rights under ISO/IEC 27018:2019. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should not use personal data for its own purposes unless explicitly permitted by the customer or required by law. When a data subject requests to access, rectify, or erase their personal data, the CSP’s obligation is to assist the customer (the data controller) in fulfilling these requests. This assistance involves providing the customer with the necessary mechanisms or information to act upon the data subject’s request. The CSP itself does not directly interact with the data subject to fulfill these rights; rather, it supports the customer’s fulfillment. Therefore, the most appropriate action for the CSP is to inform the customer about the request and provide the necessary tools or access to enable the customer to respond. This aligns with the shared responsibility model where the customer retains control over the data and its processing, while the CSP provides the secure infrastructure and support services. The other options represent either a direct, unauthorized action by the CSP (unauthorized disclosure or modification), or an abdication of responsibility (ignoring the request), neither of which is compliant with the standard’s intent regarding data subject rights and the CSP’s supportive role.

The core principle guiding the response of a cloud service provider (CSP) to a data subject access request (DSAR) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019, particularly when the CSP acts as a data processor, is to facilitate the data controller’s fulfillment of the request. The standard emphasizes that the CSP should not directly respond to the data subject unless explicitly authorized by the data controller. Instead, the CSP must have mechanisms in place to assist the data controller in accessing, rectifying, or deleting the personal data. This involves providing the data controller with the necessary tools or information to manage the data subject’s rights. Therefore, the most appropriate action for the CSP is to forward the request to the data controller, enabling the controller to then engage with the data subject as per applicable regulations like GDPR or CCPA. This approach upholds the defined roles and responsibilities within the cloud computing environment and ensures compliance with data protection principles.

The core of ISO/IEC 27018:2019, particularly concerning the responsibilities of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) in handling Personally Identifiable Information (PII), revolves around the concept of data processing and the associated controls. When a CSP acts as a data processor on behalf of a data controller, its obligations are primarily defined by the agreement between the parties and the requirements of the standard. Clause 6.2.1 of ISO/IEC 27018:2019 specifies that the CSP shall process PII only on behalf of the data controller and in accordance with the controller’s documented instructions. This includes ensuring that PII is not retained for longer than necessary for the purpose for which it was collected, and that it is not disclosed to any third party without the controller’s consent, unless required by law. The standard also mandates that the CSP shall implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to protect PII against unauthorized or unlawful processing and against accidental loss, destruction or damage. Therefore, the CSP’s primary responsibility is to adhere strictly to the data controller’s instructions and to implement robust security measures to safeguard the PII entrusted to it. This encompasses ensuring data integrity, confidentiality, and availability, all while operating within the legal and contractual framework established by the data controller and relevant data protection regulations like GDPR. The CSP’s role is to facilitate the controller’s compliance, not to independently determine the PII’s fate or processing parameters.

The core principle being tested here is the responsibility of a Cloud Service Provider (CSP) under ISO/IEC 27018:2019 concerning the handling of Personal Data (PD) when a data breach occurs, particularly when the CSP is also the data controller for certain aspects. ISO/IEC 27018:2019, in conjunction with Annex A controls and general data protection principles (like those found in GDPR, which often informs cloud data handling practices), emphasizes transparency and notification. When a CSP acts as both a data controller and a processor, and a breach impacts PD it controls, it has a direct obligation to notify the relevant supervisory authority and, in many cases, the data subjects. The standard’s focus on PII protection means that the CSP must have mechanisms in place to detect, report, and remediate breaches affecting PD. The scenario describes a situation where the CSP itself is the source of the breach due to a misconfiguration of its own infrastructure, directly impacting the PD it is entrusted with. Therefore, the CSP has the primary responsibility to initiate the notification process, even if the customer (data controller) also has obligations. The correct approach involves the CSP promptly informing the customer and, if required by applicable laws (like GDPR’s Article 33 and 34), the supervisory authority and data subjects, based on the nature and scope of the breach. The other options are incorrect because they either shift the primary responsibility inappropriately, suggest inaction, or propose a less direct and timely notification process that would not align with the stringent requirements for protecting personal data in the cloud. Specifically, waiting for the customer to discover the breach or only informing the customer without considering regulatory notification obligations would be a failure to meet the standard’s intent and likely legal requirements.