- 295 Actual Exam Questions
- Compatible with all Devices
- Printable Format
- No Download Limits
- 90 Days Free Updates
Get All Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe Exam Questions with Validated Answers
| Vendor: | IAPP |
|---|---|
| Exam Code: | CIPP-E |
| Exam Name: | Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe |
| Exam Questions: | 295 |
| Last Updated: | June 27, 2026 |
| Related Certifications: | IAPP Certification Programs |
| Exam Tags: | Intermediate Level Privacy Officers and Compliance Managers |
Looking for a hassle-free way to pass the IAPP Certified Information Privacy Professional/Europe exam? DumpsProvider provides the most reliable Dumps Questions and Answers, designed by IAPP certified experts to help you succeed in record time. Available in both PDF and Online Practice Test formats, our study materials cover every major exam topic, making it possible for you to pass potentially within just one day!
DumpsProvider is a leading provider of high-quality exam dumps, trusted by professionals worldwide. Our IAPP CIPP-E exam questions give you the knowledge and confidence needed to succeed on the first attempt.
Train with our IAPP CIPP-E exam practice tests, which simulate the actual exam environment. This real-test experience helps you get familiar with the format and timing of the exam, ensuring you're 100% prepared for exam day.
Your success is our commitment! That's why DumpsProvider offers a 100% money-back guarantee. If you don’t pass the IAPP CIPP-E exam, we’ll refund your payment within 24 hours no questions asked.
Don’t waste time with unreliable exam prep resources. Get started with DumpsProvider’s IAPP CIPP-E exam dumps today and achieve your certification effortlessly!
With respect to international transfers of personal data, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) confirmed that derogations may be relied upon under what condition?
SCENARIO
Please use the following to answer the next question:
Liem, an online retailer known for its environmentally friendly shoes, has recently expanded its presence in Europe. Anxious to achieve market dominance, Liem teamed up with another eco friendly company, EcoMick, which sells accessories like belts and bags. Together the companies drew up a series of marketing campaigns designed to highlight the environmental and economic benefits of their products. After months of planning, Liem and EcoMick entered into a data sharing agreement to use the same marketing database, MarketIQ, to send the campaigns to their respective contacts.
Liem and EcoMick also entered into a data processing agreement with MarketIQ, the terms of which included processing personal data only upon Liem and EcoMick's instructions, and making available to them all information necessary to demonstrate compliance with GDPR obligations.
Liem and EcoMick then procured the services of a company called JaphSoft, a marketing optimization firm that uses machine learning to help companies run successful campaigns. Clients provide JaphSoft with the personal data of individuals they would like to be targeted in each campaign. To ensure protection of its
clients' data, JaphSoft implements the technical and organizational measures it deems appropriate. JaphSoft works to continually improve its machine learning models by analyzing the data it receives from its clients to determine the most successful components of a successful campaign. JaphSoft then uses such models in providing services to its client-base. Since the models improve only over a period of time as more information
is collected, JaphSoft does not have a deletion process for the data it receives from clients. However, to ensure compliance with data privacy rules, JaphSoft pseudonymizes the personal data by removing identifying
information from the contact information. JaphSoft's engineers, however, maintain all contact information in the same database as the identifying information.
Under its agreement with Liem and EcoMick, JaphSoft received access to MarketIQ, which included contact information as well as prior purchase history for such contacts, to create campaigns that would result in the most views of the two companies' websites. A prior Liem customer, Ms. Iman, received a marketing campaign from JaphSoft regarding Liem's as well as EcoMick's latest products. While Ms. Iman recalls checking a box to receive information in the future regarding Liem's products, she has never shopped EcoMick, nor provided her personal data to that company.
For what reason would JaphSoft be considered a controller under the GDPR?
According to the GDPR, a data controller is the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data (Art 4(7) of GDPR). A data processor is the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which processes personal data on behalf of the controller (Art 4(8) of GDPR). In this case, JaphSoft would be considered a controller under the GDPR because it uses the personal data it receives from Liem and EcoMick to improve its own products and services through machine learning. This means that JaphSoft determines the purposes and means of this processing activity, which is not covered by the agreement with Liem and EcoMick. JaphSoft also decides how long to retain the personal data, which is another indication of its controller role. The other options are not sufficient to establish JaphSoft as a controller, as they could also apply to a processor. Having access to personal data in the MarketIQ database does not imply that JaphSoft determines the purposes and means of the processing. It could be acting on behalf of Liem and EcoMick, who are the controllers of the data in the database. Making decisions regarding the technical and organizational measures necessary to protect the personal data is also a duty of a processor, who must implement appropriate security measures in accordance with the GDPR and the instructions of the controller (Art 28 and Art 32 of GDPR).Reference:
Free CIPP/E Study Guide, p. 15
European Data Protection Law & Practice, p. 123
What is a data controller or a data processor?
CNIL publishes guidance on data processing roles under EU GDPR
Guide for multi-controller situations under the GDPR
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.
Based on the scenario, what are the primary privacy risks of the planned
surveillance system?
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 primary privacy risks of the planned surveillance system are the excessive scope of monitoring and the lack of legitimate purpose for data collection. The surveillance system involves the collection and processing of a large amount of personal data, including special categories of personal data, such as biometric data and data revealing political opinions or trade union membership, from the employees' devices and communications. The surveillance system also involves the transfer of personal data to a third country, China, which does not provide an adequate level of data protection. The surveillance system does not seem to have a clear and specific purpose that is necessary and proportionate to the legitimate interests of the employer, such as preventing fraud, ensuring network security, or complying with legal obligations. The surveillance system also does not seem to respect the principles of data minimisation, purpose limitation, transparency, and accountability. The surveillance system may infringe the rights and freedoms of the employees, such as the right to privacy, the right to data protection, the right to non-discrimination, the right to dignity, and the right to freedom of expression and association.
GDPR, Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 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, pages 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28.
EDPB Guidelines 4/2019 on Article 25 Data Protection by Design and by Default, pages 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28.
EDPB Guidelines 2/2018 on derogations of Article 49 under Regulation 2016/679, pages 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12.
Data protection: GDPR and employee surveilance | Feature | Law Gazette, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.
WP29's ''Guidelines on Personal data breach notification under Regulation 2016/679'' provides examples of ways to communicate data breaches transparently. Which of the following was listed as a method that would NOT be effective for communicating a breach to data subjects?
According to the WP29's ''Guidelines on Personal data breach notification under Regulation 2016/679'', the communication of a personal data breach to the data subjects should be clear, concise, transparent, easily accessible and understandable, and use clear and plain language. The communication should also be made as soon as reasonably feasible and in close cooperation with the supervisory authority. The guidelines provide some examples of methods that may be effective for communicating a breach to data subjects, such as a direct electronic message (e.g. email, SMS, direct message), a postal notification, a prominent advertisement in print media, or a notice on the homepage of the affected website. However, the guidelines also state that a notice on a corporate blog or social media would not be an effective method of communication, as it would not reach all the affected data subjects and would not allow them to take immediate action to protect themselves. Therefore, the correct answer is C. A notice on a corporate blog.Reference:
WP29's ''Guidelines on Personal data breach notification under Regulation 2016/679'', pages 20-211
A U.S. company's website sells widgets. Which of the following factors would NOT in itself subject the company to the GDPR?
Art. 3 GDPR -- Territorial scope
Guidelines 3/2018 on the territorial scope of the GDPR (Article 3)
What does territorial scope mean under the GDPR?
I hope this helps you understand the GDPR and territorial scope better. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask me.
Security & Privacy
Satisfied Customers
Committed Service
Money Back Guranteed