GDPR Article 28 — Processor

What this control requires

Controllers must use processors with GDPR-compliant measures to protect data subjects' rights, governed by a binding contract. Processors require authorization for sub-processors, ensure confidentiality, assist with compliance, and allow audits. This control addresses Processor Management.

In plain English

Controllers must use processors with GDPR-compliant measures to protect data subjects' rights, governed by a binding contract. In practice, this means you can prove you data controller-level controls on a defined cadence.

Why it matters

GDPR administrative fines reach the greater of €20 million or 4% of global annual turnover. The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) coordinates supervisory-authority enforcement across the EU/EEA, and DPAs publish enforcement decisions citing specific Articles.

This control is rated high. Auditors expect a named owner, a remediation SLA, and a tooling artefact that evidences continuous operation.

What an auditor looks for

A DPA or privacy auditor expects: a Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) entry, a documented lawful basis, evidence the Article's data-subject right is operationalised end-to-end, a named DPO contact (where required), and Article 30 records that match what the front-end actually does.

Within Chapter IV: Controller and Processor, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Article Article 28) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles.

How to implement

Policy Management

Docs. Keep each policy in version-controlled Markdown alongside the code that implements it; ship a signed PDF snapshot at each annual review and link the SHA into the SoA.

Operational checklist

• Data. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Processor. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Security. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Confidentiality. Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence.
• Scope: controller, controllers, rights, data subjects.

Evidence to collect

• Vendor Risk Management. vendor_risk_management evidence
• Policy Document. A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document.

Third-party risk management evidence (assessments, contracts, due diligence) shows supplier oversight. Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Processor.

Common pitfalls

• Policies that no engineer has read; the version in Confluence drifts from the version that's actually being enforced.

How it maps to other frameworks

Computed from shared tags, control component and key-operation subjects — handy when you are reconciling controls across an audit.

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.5.19 — Information security in supplier relationships
• CIS Controls v8 3.8 — Document Data Flows
• ISO/IEC 42001:2023 A.10.2 — Allocation of responsibilities
• BSI C5:2020 SSO-01 — Policies and instructions for controlling and monitoring third parties
• NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3 3.11.1 — Risk Assessment

Related controls in GDPR

• Article Article 27 — Representatives of controllers or processors not established in the Union
• Article Article 33 — Notification of a personal data breach to the supervisory authority
• Article Article 34 — Communication of a personal data breach to the data subject
• Article Article 79 — Right to an effective judicial remedy against a controller or processor
• Article Article 25 — Data protection by design and by default
• Article Article 21 — Right to object

References

• European Union — GDPR
• Catalogue identifier: Article Article 28

Topics: governance riskvendor riskvendor managementsupply chain securitypolicy managementthird party monitoring