An organization contracts a service provider to process sensitive data. The provider uses several downstream entities (subprocessors) for its operations. Which action BEST ensures data protection accountability throughout this supply chain?
Establish a higher financial penalty in the contract for any data breach caused by a subprocessor.
Depend on the vendor management language included in the provider's standard Master Service Agreement (MSA).
Amend the primary contract to include 'flow-down' security requirements and a right-to-audit clause for subprocessors.
Accept the primary provider's SOC 2 report as sufficient evidence of subprocessor due diligence.
The most effective way to ensure accountability is to use contractual agreements to enforce security requirements down the supply chain. Amending the primary contract to include 'flow-down' clauses and a right to audit ensures that the primary vendor is legally obligated to hold its subprocessors to the same standards it must meet. A provider's standard compliance report (SOC 2) may not cover all subprocessors or meet the organization's specific requirements. Relying on standard MSA clauses is insufficient, as they are often too generic. Financial penalties are a reactive measure for assigning liability after a breach, but they do not proactively ensure data protection.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are 'flow-down' clauses in contracts?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is a SOC 2 report, and why is it insufficient alone for subprocessors?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why are financial penalties not enough to ensure data protection?