in compliance with applicable and where they apply to privacy laws and regulations functional requirements and risks. 2.3–Engineering Controls: Strict MUST include software retirement limits should be placed on each plan from a privacy viewpoint phase of data processing lifecycle engaged by the software under development, including: Limiting Collection; Collecting by Fair and Lawful Collecting from Third Parties; Limiting Uses and Disclosures; Limiting Retention; Disposal, Destruction; and Redaction 3. Privacy 3.1–Holistic and Integrative: The OASIS PMRM Privacy Use Case Embedded into Privacy commitments must be Template is RECOMMENDED for Design embedded in holistic and identifying and documenting privacy integrative ways requirements. 3.2–Systematic and Auditable: MUST contain description of business A systematic, principled approach showing traceability of personal should be adopted that relies upon data flows for any data collected accepted standards and process through new software services under frameworks, and is amenable to development. external review. include identification of privacy MUST 3.3–Review and Assess: design principles Detailed privacy impact and risk MUST contain a privacy architecture assessments should be used as a MUST describe privacy UI/UX design for design decisions. MUST define privacy metrics 3.4–Human-Proof: The privacy risks should be demonstrably MUST include human sign-offs/privacy minimized and not increase checklists for software engineering through use, misconfiguration, or artifacts error. MUST include privacy review reports (either in reviewed documents or in separate report) 4. Full Functionality: 4.1–No Loss of Functionality: MUST treat privacy-as-a-functional Positive Sum, not Embedding privacy adds to the requirement (see section XXX), i.e. Zero-Sum desired functionality of a given functional software requirements and technology, process or network privacy requirements should be architecture. considered together, with no loss of functionality. 4.2-Accommodate Legitimate Objectives: All interests and MUST show tests for meeting privacy objectives must be documented, objectives, in terms of the operation desired functions articulated, and effectiveness of implemented metrics agreed, and trade-offs privacy controls or services. rejected, when seeking a solution that enables multi-functionality 4.3–Practical and Demonstrable Results: Optimized outcomes
in compliance with applicable laws and regulations 2.3–Engineering Controls: Strict limits should be placed on each phase of data processing lifecycle engaged by the software under development, including: Limiting Collection; Collecting by Fair and Lawful Collecting from Third Parties; Limiting Uses and Disclosures; Limiting Retention; Disposal, Destruction; and Redaction and where they apply to privacy functional requirements and risks. MUST include software retirement plan from a privacy viewpoint 3. Privacy Embedded into Design 3.1–Holistic and Integrative: Privacy commitments must be embedded in holistic and integrative ways 3.2–Systematic and Auditable: A systematic, principled approach should be adopted that relies upon accepted standards and process frameworks, and is amenable to external review. 3.3–Review and Assess: Detailed privacy impact and risk assessments should be used as a for design decisions. 3.4–Human-Proof: The privacy risks should be demonstrably minimized and not increase through use, misconfiguration, or error. The OASIS PMRM Privacy Use Case Template is RECOMMENDED for identifying and documenting privacy requirements. MUST contain description of business showing traceability of personal data flows for any data collected through new software services under development. MUST include identification of privacy design principles MUST contain a privacy architecture MUST describe privacy UI/UX design MUST define privacy metrics MUST include human sign-offs/privacy checklists for software engineering artifacts MUST include privacy review reports (either in reviewed documents or in separate report) 4. Full Functionality: Positive Sum, not Zero-Sum 4.1–No Loss of Functionality: Embedding privacy adds to the desired functionality of a given technology, process or network architecture. 4.2-Accommodate Legitimate Objectives: All interests and objectives must be documented, desired functions articulated, metrics agreed, and trade-offs rejected, when seeking a solution that enables multi-functionality 4.3–Practical and Demonstrable Results: Optimized outcomes MUST treat privacy-as-a-functional requirement (see section XXX), i.e. functional software requirements and privacy requirements should be considered together, with no loss of functionality. MUST show tests for meeting privacy objectives, in terms of the operation and effectiveness of implemented privacy controls or services.