Skip to main content

PRI-14: Data Privacy Requirements for Contractors & Service Providers

PRI 10 — Critical Identify

Mechanisms exist to include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.

Renumbered: Formerly PRI-07.1 in SCF 2025.4.

Code reused: In SCF 2025.4 and earlier, PRI-14 was Documenting Data Processing Activities. That control is now PRI-05.

Control Question: Does the organization include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers?

General (18)
Framework Mapping Values
AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF) D6.4
AICPA TSC 2017:2022 (used for SOC 2) (source) P6.1-POF1 P6.4 P6.4-POF3
CIS CSC 8.1 15.4
CIS CSC 8.1 IG2 15.4
CIS CSC 8.1 IG3 15.4
CSA CCM 4.1.0 DSP-13 IPY-04
CSA IoT SCF 2 CLS-04
ISO 27002 2022 5.31 5.33
ISO 27017 2015 18.1.4
ISO 27018 2025 5.1(a) 5.31 5.33
ISO 29100 2024 6.10
NIST 800-53 R4 AR-3
NIST 800-218 PO.1
NIST CSF 2.0 (source) GV.SC-05
NIST Privacy Framework 1.0 ID.DE-P3
OWASP Top 10 2025 A01:2025 A02:2025 A05:2025 A07:2025 A09:2025 A10:2025
SCF DPMP 2026 10.3
TISAX ISA 6.0.3 9.5.2
US (12)
Framework Mapping Values
USA Federal CMS MARS-E 2.0 AR-3 AR-3.a AR-3.b
USA Federal HIPAA Administrative Simplification 2013 § 164.504(e)(2)(i) § 164.504(e)(2)(ii)(A) § 164.504(e)(2)(ii)(B) § 164.504(e)(2)(ii)(C) § 164.504(e)(4)(i) § 164.504(e)(4)(i)(A) § 164.504(e)(4)(i)(B) § 164.504(e)(4)(i)(B)(ii) § 164.504(e)(4)(i)(B)(ii)(A)
USA California CCPA 2025 7012(g)(2) 7022(c) 7022(c)(1) 7022(c)(2) 7022(c)(3) 7022(c)(4) 7022(d) 7023(c) 7024(i) 7050(a) 7050(a)(1) 7050(a)(2) 7050(a)(3) 7050(a)(4) 7050(b) 7050(c) 7050(d) 7050(e) 7050(f) 7050(g) 7050(h) 7050(h)(1) 7050(h)(2) 7051(a) 7051(a)(1) 7051(a)(2) 7051(a)(3) 7051(a)(4) 7051(a)(5) 7051(a)(6) 7051(a)(7) 7051(a)(8) 7051(a)(9) 7053(a)(1) 7053(a)(2) 7053(a)(3) 7053(a)(4)
USA Illinois PIPA 2006 45(b)
USA Montana CDPA 2025 30-14-2813(1) 30-14-2813(1)(a) 30-14-2813(1)(b) 30-14-2813(1)(c) 30-14-2813(2) 30-14-2813(2)(d) 30-14-2815(1)(c) 30-14-2815(5) 30-14-2818(1) 30-14-2818(1)(a) 30-14-2818(1)(b) 30-14-2818(2)
USA Nevada Privacy Law 2023 603A.210.3 603A.495.3(d) 603A.530.1 603A.530.2 603A.530.3 603A.530.3(a) 603A.530.3(b)
USA Oregon CPA 2023 Section 6(1) Section 6(1)(a) Section 6(2) Section 7(1)(a)(C)
USA Oregon 646A 2025 646A.581(2)
USA Tennessee TIPA 2025 47-18-3205(a) 47-18-3205(a)(1) 47-18-3205(a)(2) 47-18-3205(b) 47-18-3205(b)(1) 47-18-3205(b)(2) 47-18-3205(b)(3) 47-18-3205(b)(4) 47-18-3205(b)(5) 47-18-3205(c) 47-18-3205(d)
USA Texas CDPA 2025 541.104(a)(1) 541.104(a)(2) 541.104(a)(3) 541.104(b)(1) 541.104(b)(2) 541.104(b)(3) 541.104(b)(4) 541.104(b)(5) 541.104(b)(6)(A) 541.104(b)(6)(B) 541.104(b)(6)(C) 541.104(b)(6)(D) 541.104(b)(6)(E) 541.104(c) 541.106(a)(3) 541.106(d)
USA Texas TRAIGA 2025 Sec. 3 / 541.104(a) Sec. 3 / 541.104(a)(1) Sec. 3 / 541.104(a)(2) Sec. 3 / 541.104(a)(3)
USA Virginia CDPA 2023 59.1-578.B 59.1-579.A 59.1-579.A.1 59.1-579.A.2 59.1-579.A.3 59.1-579.B 59.1-579.B.3 59.1-579.B.4 59.1-579.B.5 59.1-581.A.3 59.1-581.E
EMEA (13)
Framework Mapping Values
EMEA Austria FAPPD 2000 § 48(1) § 48(2) § 48(3) § 48(4) § 48(5) § 48(6)
EMEA Belgium Act 8 1992 Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 53(1) Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 53(2) Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 53(3) Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 53(4) Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 53(5) Title 2, Chapter IV, Section 3, Art. 54
EMEA EU GDPR 2016 Article 28.1 Article 28.2 Article 28.3 Article 28.3(a) Article 28.3(b) Article 28.3(c) Article 28.3(d) Article 28.3(e) Article 28.3(f) Article 28.3(g) Article 28.3(h) Article 28.4 Article 28.5 Article 28.6 Article 28.7 Article 28.8 Article 28.9 Article 28.10 Article 29 Article 46.3(a)
EMEA UK DPA 2018 Section 59(1) Section 59(2) Section 59(2)(a) Section 59(2)(b) Section 59(3) Section 59(4) Section 59(5) Section 59(5)(a) Section 59(5)(b) Section 59(5)(c) Section 59(5)(d) Section 59(6) Section 59(6)(a) Section 59(6)(b) Section 59(6)(c) Section 59(6)(d) Section 59(6)(d)(i) Section 59(6)(d)(ii) Section 59(6)(e) Section 59(6)(f) Section 59(7) Section 59(7A) Section 59(8) Section 60 Section 60(a) Section 60(b) Section 63
EMEA Greece PIRPPD 1997 B.10.4
EMEA Hungary Act CXII 2011 II.7.8(1)(b) II.8.9(1) II.8.9(1)(c) II.8.9(1)(e) II.8.9(2) II.8.9(3) II.8.9(5) II.9.10(1) II.9.10(2) II.9.10(3) II.9.10(4) II.10.11(1)(a)
EMEA Ireland DPA 2018 s.80
EMEA Israel PPL 2025 s.13A
EMEA Kenya DPA 2019 IV.25(h) IV.40(2)(a) IV.40(2)(b) IV.40(3) IV.42(2)(a) IV.42(2)(b) IV.42(3) IV.42(4)
EMEA LUX CCSF 22/806 2022 32 38.g 74 87
EMEA Nigeria DPR 2019 2.7
EMEA Serbia 87/2018 IV.1.45-1 IV.1.45-1(1) IV.1.45-1(2) IV.1.45-1(3) IV.1.45-1(4) IV.1.45-1(5) IV.1.45-1(6) IV.1.45-1(7) IV.1.45-1(8) IV.1.45-2 IV.1.45-2(1) IV.1.45-2(2) IV.1.45-2(3) IV.1.45-2(4) IV.1.45-2(5) IV.1.45-2(6)
EMEA South Africa POPIA 2013 3.A.7.21(1) 3.A.7.21(2)
APAC (8)
Americas (5)
Framework Mapping Values
Americas Bahamas DPA 2003 V.51(1)(a) V.51(1)(b) V.51(1)(b)(i) V.51(1)(b)(ii) V.51(1)(b)(iii) V.51(1)(b)(iv) V.51(2)(a) V.51(2)(b) V.51(2)(c) V.51(2)(d) V.51(2)(e) V.51(2)(f) V.51(2)(g) V.51(2)(h) V.51(3) V.51(4) V.51(5) V.51(5)(a) V.51(5)(b) V.51(6) V.51(7) V.51(8)
Americas Brazil LGPD 2018 VI.I.39
Americas Canada PIPEDA 2000 P1-4.1.3
Americas Colombia Law 1581 2012 VI.17(i)
Americas Mexico FDPA 2010 II.21

Capability Maturity Model

Level 0 — Not Performed

Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.

Level 1 — Performed Informally

SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.

Level 2 — Planned & Tracked

SCR-CMM Level 2 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude a well-defined and standardized process is required. ▪ At this level of maturity, the “requirements-driven” nature of performing the control is focused on a localized and/or regionalized implementation, not uniform and consistent across the organization. ▪ Requirements are narrowly scoped for applicability and are primarily derived from compliance obligations (e.g., laws, regulations and contracts).

Level 3 — Well Defined

Privacy (PRI) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with PRI domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with PRI domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ A data privacy team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain PRI domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of data privacy operations (e.g., privacy notice management software and customer management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with PRI domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to include data privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish data privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.

Level 4 — Quantitatively Controlled

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

Level 5 — Continuously Improving

Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.

Assessment Objectives

  1. PRI-14_A01 includes privacy requirements in contracts and other acquisition-related documents that establish privacy roles and responsibilities for contractors and service providers.

Evidence Requirements

E-PRI-05 Data Sharing Agreement

Documented evidence of formal data sharing practices that address, at a minimum: • The business justification for the data sharing; • The type / category of data being shared; • The third-parties the data is being shared with; • Lawful bases for data sharing; and • Data subject rights.

Privacy
E-TPM-01 Third-Party Contracts

Documented evidence of third-party contractual obligations for cybersecurity & data privacy protections.

Third-Party Management

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.