Skip to main content

PRI-05: Personal Data (PD) Retention & Disposal

PRI 8 — High Identify

Mechanisms exist to: (1) Retain Personal Data (PD), including metadata, for an organization-defined time period to fulfill the purpose(s) identified in the notice or as required by law; (2) Dispose of, destroys, erases, and/or anonymizes the PD, regardless of the method of storage; and (3) Use organization-defined techniques or methods to ensure secure deletion or destruction of PD (including originals, copies and archived records).

Control Question: Does the organization: (1) Retain Personal Data (PD), including metadata, for an organization-defined time period to fulfill the purpose(s) identified in the notice or as required by law; (2) Dispose of, destroys, erases, and/or anonymizes the PD, regardless of the method of storage; and (3) Use organization-defined techniques or methods to ensure secure deletion or destruction of PD (including originals, copies and archived records)?

General (46)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) C1.1-POF3 C1.2 C1.2-POF1 C1.2-POF2 CC6.5 CC6.5-POF2 P4.0 P4.2 P4.2-POF1 P4.3 P4.3-POF2 P4.3-POF3
CIS CSC 8.1 3.5
CIS CSC 8.1 IG1 3.5
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 3.5
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 3.5
CSA CCM 4 DSP-16
Generally Accepted Privacy Principles (GAPP) 5.2.2 5.2.3
GovRAMP Low SI-12
GovRAMP Low+ SI-12
GovRAMP Moderate SI-12
GovRAMP High SI-12
ISO 27002 2022 5.33 8.10
ISO 27017 2015 18.1.4
ISO 27018 2014 A.4.1 A.9.2 A.9.3 A.10.2 A.10.7 A.10.8 A.10.9
ISO 29100 2024 6.5 6.6
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 CT.DM-P5
NIST 800-53 R4 DM-2
NIST 800-53 R5 (source) AC-4(25) SI-12 SI-12(3)
NIST 800-53B R5 (privacy) (source) SI-12 SI-12(3)
NIST 800-53B R5 (low) (source) SI-12
NIST 800-53B R5 (moderate) (source) SI-12
NIST 800-53B R5 (high) (source) SI-12
NIST 800-53 R5 (NOC) (source) AC-4(25)
NIST 800-82 R3 LOW OT Overlay SI-12
NIST 800-82 R3 MODERATE OT Overlay SI-12
NIST 800-82 R3 HIGH OT Overlay SI-12
NIST 800-160 3.4.14
NIST 800-161 R1 SI-12
NIST 800-161 R1 C-SCRM Baseline SI-12
NIST 800-161 R1 Level 3 SI-12
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) ID.AM-07
PCI DSS 4.0.1 (source) 9.4.6 9.4.7 10.5.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A (source) 9.4.6
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ A-EP (source) 9.4.6 10.5.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B (source) 9.4.6
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ B-IP (source) 9.4.6
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C (source) 9.4.6 10.5.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ C-VT (source) 9.4.6
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Merchant (source) 9.4.6 9.4.7 10.5.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ D Service Provider (source) 9.4.6 9.4.7 10.5.1
PCI DSS 4.0.1 SAQ P2PE (source) 9.4.6
SCF CORE Mergers, Acquisitions & Divestitures (MA&D) PRI-05
SCF CORE ESP Level 1 Foundational PRI-05
SCF CORE ESP Level 2 Critical Infrastructure PRI-05
SCF CORE ESP Level 3 Advanced Threats PRI-05
SCF CORE AI Model Deployment PRI-05
US (18)
Framework Mapping Values
US CERT RMM 1.2 KIM:SG4.SP3
US CJIS Security Policy 5.9.3 (source) 4.2.2 4.2.3.1 4.2.3.2 4.3 SI-12
US CMS MARS-E 2.0 DM-2
US Data Privacy Framework (DPF) II.5.b
US FERPA (source) 1232g
US FIPPS 4
US GLBA CFR 314 2023 (source) 314.4(c)(6)(i)
US HIPAA HICP Large Practice 9.L.C
US IRS 1075 2.F.1 2.F.3 SI-12
US SSA EIESR 8.0 5.8
US - AK PIPA 45.48.500
US - IL BIPA 15(a) 15(b)(2)
US - IL PIPA 40(a) 40(b) 40(b)(1) 40(b)(2) 40(c) 40(d) 40(e) 40(f)
US - NY SHIELD Act S5575B 4(2)(b)(ii)(C)(4)
US - OR CPA 4(7)(a)
US - TN TIPA 47-18-3203(a)(2)(C)(i)(a) 47-18-3204(a)(4)
US - TX BC521 521.052(b)
US - TX DIR Control Standards 2.0 SI-12
EMEA (28)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA EU AI Act 10.5(e)
EMEA EU GDPR (source) 5.1(e)
EMEA EU PSD2 24
EMEA Austria Sec 7
EMEA Belgium 4-7 21
EMEA Germany Sec 3a Sec 5 Sec 13 Sec 14 Sec 20
EMEA Germany C5 2020 OPS-11 OPS-12 PI-03
EMEA Greece 4 7
EMEA Hungary 5
EMEA Ireland 2
EMEA Israel CDMO 1.0 15.4
EMEA Israel 8
EMEA Italy 11
EMEA Kenya DPA 2019 25(g) 34(3) 39(1) 39(1)(a) 39(1)(b) 39(1)(c) 39(1)(d) 39(2)
EMEA Netherlands 6 7 9 10 12
EMEA Nigeria DPR 2019 2.1(1)(c)
EMEA Norway 8 11 15 27 28
EMEA Poland 23 26
EMEA Russia 5
EMEA Saudi Arabia PDPL 11.4 18.1 18.2.a 18.2.b
EMEA Saudi Arabia SAMA CSF 1.0 3.3.11
EMEA Serbia 87/2018 5.5 8
EMEA South Africa 4 14 16
EMEA Spain 1720/2007 8 22
EMEA Sweden 9
EMEA Switzerland 4
EMEA Turkey 5 7
EMEA UK DPA Chapter29-Schedule1-Part1-Principle 5
APAC (13)
Framework Mapping Values
APAC Australia Privacy Act APP Part 3 APP Part 6
APAC Australian Privacy Principles APP 4 APP 6
APAC China Privacy Law 10 19 47 47(1) 47(2) 47(3) 47(4) 47(5)
APAC Hong Kong Principle 2 Sec 26 Principle 3 Sec 4
APAC India ITR 5
APAC Japan APPI 19
APAC Japan ISMAP 18.1.4
APAC Malaysia 5 6 10
APAC Philippines 19 21
APAC Singapore 23 25
APAC Singapore MAS TRM 2021 11.1.7
APAC South Korea 3 4 15 19 21 37
APAC Taiwan 5 19
Americas (11)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Argentina PPL 4
Americas Argentina Reg 132-2018 5.1 4.3 9.2
Americas Bahamas 6 12
Americas Brazil LGPD 6.2 6.9 13 14 15 21
Americas Canada PIPEDA Sec 7 Sec 8 Principle 5 Principle 6
Americas Chile 9
Americas Colombia 4
Americas Costa Rica 6
Americas Mexico 7 8 9 11 12 13 14
Americas Peru 7 8 14
Americas Uruguay 5 6 20 21 22

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

There is no evidence of a capability to: (1) Retain Personal Data (PD), including metadata, for an organization-defined time period to fulfill the purpose(s) identified in the notice or as required by law; (2) Dispose of, destroys, erases, and/or anonymizes the PD, regardless of the method of storage; and (3) Use organization-defined techniques or methods to ensure secure deletion or destruction of PD (including originals, copies and archived records).

Level 1 — Performed Informally

Privacy (PRI) efforts are ad hoc and inconsistent. CMM Level 1 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • No formal data privacy team exists. Privacy roles are assigned to existing IT / cybersecurity.
  • Formal roles and responsibilities for data privacy may exist.
  • No formal data privacy principles are identified for the organization.
  • An ad hoc approach to Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) exists.
Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

Privacy (PRI) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Privacy management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
  • The data privacy program is developed to work with IT and cybersecurity staff to ensure that applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual data privacy obligations for Personal Data (PD) are properly identified and implemented across the enterprise.
  • IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity and data protection controls to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for data privacy management.
  • A qualified individual is formally assigned as the Chief Privacy Officer (CPO), or similar role, to lead the organization's data privacy program. This individual may be assigned to multiple duties, including that as a Data Protection Officer (DPO).
  • The CPO, or similar role, identifies “data privacy principles” that systems, applications, services, processes and third-parties must adhere to, based on leading data privacy practices.
  • Administrative processes and technologies retain PD, including metadata, for an organization-defined time period to fulfill the purpose(s) identified in the data privacy notice, or as required by law.
  • Administrative processes and technologies dispose of, destroy, erase, and/ or anonymize the PD, regardless of the method of storage.
Level 3 — Well Defined

Privacy (PRI) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • A Chief Privacy Officer (CPO), or similar function with technical competence to address data privacy concerns, analyzes the organization's business strategy to develop and publish authoritative guidance on the organization's data privacy program.
  • A Privacy program, run by a CPO, or similar role, ensures that applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual data privacy obligations are properly identified and implemented to limit and secure Personal Data (PD) that the organization stores, transmits and processes.
  • As part of the organization's data privacy program, the CPO publishes a clear set of “data privacy principles”, based on leading data privacy practices, that systems, applications, services, processes and third-parties must adhere to.
  • A Project Management Office (PMO), or project management function, ensures both cybersecurity and data privacy principles are identified and implemented within ongoing or planned projects.
  • The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function with technical competence to address cybersecurity concerns, analyzes the organization's business strategy to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for cybersecurity-related data privacy practices.
  • The CISO, or similar function, develops a security-focused Concept of Operations (CONOPS) that documents management, operational and technical measures to apply defense-in-depth techniques across the enterprise for cybersecurity-related data privacy practices.
  • A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity and data protection controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's applications, systems, services and data with regards to data privacy.
  • A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity and data privacy program.
  • Data/process owners operationalize data privacy controls into the processes they control.
  • Third-party contracts included data protection requirements, including flow-down requirements to subcontractors.
  • Data Protection Officers (DPOs) are assigned to work closely with business units and project teams to ensure data privacy principles are being implemented.
  • CPO and DPO determine and document the legal authority that permits the collection, use, maintenance and sharing of PD, either generally or in support of a specific program or system need.
Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Privacy (PRI) efforts are metrics driven and provide sufficient management insight (based on a quantitative understanding of process capabilities) to predict optimal performance, ensure continued operations and identify areas for improvement. In addition to CMM Level 3 criteria, CMM Level 4 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).
  • Metrics reporting includes quantitative analysis of Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
  • Scope of metrics, KPIs and KRIs covers organization-wide cybersecurity and data protection controls, including functions performed by third-parties.
  • Organizational leadership maintains a formal process to objectively review and respond to metrics, KPIs and KRIs (e.g., monthly or quarterly review).
  • Based on metrics analysis, process improvement recommendations are submitted for review and are handled in accordance with change control processes.
  • Both business and technical stakeholders are involved in reviewing and approving proposed changes.
Level 5 — Continuously Improving

Privacy (PRI) efforts are “world-class” capabilities that leverage predictive analysis (e.g., machine learning, AI, etc.). In addition to CMM Level 4 criteria, CMM Level 5 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

  • Stakeholders make time-sensitive decisions to support operational efficiency, which may include automated remediation actions.
  • Based on predictive analysis, process improvements are implemented according to “continuous improvement” practices that affect process changes.

Assessment Objectives

  1. PRI-05_A01 techniques used to dispose of information following the retention period are defined.
  2. PRI-05_A02 techniques used to destroy information following the retention period are defined.
  3. PRI-05_A03 techniques used to erase information following the retention period are defined.
  4. PRI-05_A04 organization-defined techniques are used to dispose of information following the retention period.
  5. PRI-05_A05 organization-defined techniques are used to destroy information following the retention period.
  6. PRI-05_A06 organization-defined techniques are used to erase information following the retention period.
  7. PRI-05_A07 information within the system is retained in accordance with applicable laws, Executive Orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, guidelines and operational requirements.
  8. PRI-05_A08 information output from the system is retained in accordance with applicable laws, Executive Orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, guidelines and operational requirements.
  9. PRI-05_A09 information within the system is managed in accordance with applicable laws, Executive Orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, guidelines and operational requirements.
  10. PRI-05_A10 information output from the system is managed in accordance with applicable laws, Executive Orders, directives, regulations, policies, standards, guidelines and operational requirements.

Evidence Requirements

E-AST-11 Data Retention Program

Documented evidence of a formal data retention program that governs the retention and destruction of data types.

Asset Management
E-PRI-02 Authorized Use

Documented evidence of authorized use definitions for privacy-related data operations.

Privacy

Technology Recommendations

Micro/Small

  • Data classification program
  • Data privacy program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Product / project management

Small

  • Data classification program
  • Data privacy program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Product / project management

Medium

  • Data classification program
  • Data privacy program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Product / project management

Large

  • Data classification program
  • Data privacy program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Product / project management

Enterprise

  • Data classification program
  • Data privacy program
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA)
  • Product / project management

The Secure Controls Framework (SCF) is maintained by SCF Council. Use of SCF content is subject to the SCF Terms & Conditions.

Manage this control in SCF Connect

Track implementation status, collect evidence, and map controls to your compliance frameworks automatically.