跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

data-subject-request-procedure

Use this skill when a company needs a working process for privacy requests, or just received one and has none, and asks "DSAR procedure", "how do we handle a subject access request", "someone asked us to delete their data", "right to erasure process", "data subject rights workflow", "GDPR request handling" or "we missed the one-month deadline". Designs intake from any channel, a proportionate identity check, the system search map, review and redaction, response templates per right, deadline tracking and a request log, written as a procedure the support and privacy teams can run.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md7.8 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Use this to build the procedure once and to rehearse it before a real request arrives. You get four files in a new folder, ./data-subject-request-procedure/: the written procedure staff follow when someone asks for their data (procedure.md); a table of every system holding personal data, with how to search, export and delete in each (system-search-map.md); plain-language reply letters, one per type of request (response-templates.md); and an empty spreadsheet you can open in Excel to log each request and its deadline (request-log-template.csv). This skill drafts for a human to review and sign; this skill never marks a control effective. The privacy lead approves the procedure and every response before it is sent.

Inputs to gather

Read the record of processing activities, system and vendor lists, data processing agreements, the privacy notice, support tooling and past requests. Ask the reader, in one message: who is the privacy contact or data protection officer, which channels customers and staff use to reach the company, whether the company also processes data for customers (then requests about that data belong to the customer), and which countries' supervisory authorities matter.

Step 1: design intake

A request is valid whatever the channel or wording: an email to any employee, a support ticket, a chat message, a letter. The procedure says:

  • Every front-line role forwards anything that looks like a privacy request to one queue within one business day, with the original message and the date it arrived. The deadline runs from receipt by the company, not from arrival in the queue.
  • A web form may be offered, never required.
  • If the company is the processor for the data concerned, it forwards the request to the customer as the data processing agreement sets out (the assistance term in Article 28(3)(e)) and does not answer it.

Step 2: verify identity proportionately

Use what the company already trusts: a request from the account's email address or the logged-in product is usually enough. Ask for more only where there are reasonable doubts (Article 12(6) of the GDPR) and ask for the least that resolves them. Do not demand a copy of an identity document by default; it collects more data than the request needs. Requests made through an agent or lawyer need evidence of their authority. Record what was checked and the dates: ask promptly, never use verification to buy time, and follow the supervisory authority's guidance on how the clock runs while you wait.

Step 3: track the deadline

Article 12(3) sets the response time: without undue delay and within one month of receipt, extendable by two further months for complex or numerous requests, provided the person is told of the extension and the reasons within the first month. Set an internal target of about 20 calendar days so reviews and extensions fit. Requests are free; for manifestly unfounded or excessive requests a reasonable fee or a refusal is possible under Article 12(5), with reasons recorded, and the privacy lead decides.

Step 4: build the system search map

In the search table (system-search-map.md), one row per system holding personal data, taken from the processing record: data held, search key (email, customer id, phone), owner role, how to export, how to delete or restrict, what happens in backups (data put beyond use and removed as backups rotate), and processors to ask. Include unstructured places: shared mailboxes, chat, documents and the support tool. A search map written before the first request is what makes the deadline achievable.

Step 5: review, redact and respond per right

  • Access (Article 15): a copy of the data plus the information that article lists (purposes, categories, recipients, retention, source, rights, automated decisions, transfer safeguards). Remove other people's data and confidential business information (the copy must not adversely affect others, Article 15(4)); the privacy lead checks any exemption with counsel.
  • Rectification and erasure (Articles 16 and 17): confirm what changed or was deleted, and what is kept and why, naming the Article 17(3) ground relied on (a legal retention duty, a legal claim). Tell recipients where Article 19 applies.
  • Restriction, portability, objection and automated decisions (Articles 18, 20, 21 and 22): an objection to direct marketing is always honoured; other objections need a documented assessment.

Any refusal, full or partial, goes out within one month with the reasons and the right to complain to a supervisory authority and to seek a judicial remedy (Article 12(4)). Write one reply letter per right in plain language in response-templates.md, and deliver data through a secure channel, never as an open attachment to an unverified address.

Step 6: log and learn

The request log spreadsheet (request-log-template.csv) holds request id, received date, type, verification method, extension, systems searched, outcome and closed date, and no copy of the data released. The log is itself personal data: restrict it to the privacy team and give it a retention period. Review it every quarter: requests answered on time, by type, and the systems that slowed the search.

What good looks like

  • The best practitioner checks first whether front-line staff recognise a request that does not use legal words ("what do you have on me?", "close my account and forget me"). Missed recognition is the most common cause of a missed deadline.
  • The common mistake is a procedure that starts at form submission, asks everyone for a passport scan and searches only the main database. The tell: no search map, no unstructured sources, receipt dates taken from the queue.
  • Good output lets a support agent who has never seen a request route it correctly on day one, and lets the privacy lead prove from the log that each request was answered within its deadline.

Framework lookups

If ISMS Copilot is connected to your agent (MCP server https://account.ismscopilot.com/v1/account/mcp), ask it the framework question with create_conversation (mode think, answer_format: decision) and keep one conversation for this task. Send only a short question in your own words, show it to the user first, and never include file contents, secrets, personal data or evidence. If it is not connected, check the official text of the framework yourself; this skill does not restate it. Set it up: https://www.ismscopilot.com/mcp?ref=grcskills-data-subject-request-procedure

Rules

  • MUST start every deadline from the date the company first received the request.
  • MUST route every response through the privacy lead's review before it is sent.
  • MUST write outputs only inside ./data-subject-request-procedure/ and ask before overwriting.
  • NEVER send a response, delete data or change a system as part of this skill; the procedure tells humans how.
  • NEVER put a requester's personal data or released data in the log or the templates.
  • NEVER require an identity document by default.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Use this skill when a company needs rules for how staff use company systems, data, devices and AI tools, or asks "write our acceptable use policy", "AUP for employees", "can staff use ChatGPT at work", "AI usage policy", "BYOD rules", "remote work security rules" or "a policy people will actually read". Finds how people really work (devices, apps, AI tools, travel), puts the choices to the reader as decisions, drafts a short plain-language policy with concrete do and do not examples, and adds a comprehension check and an acknowledgement text for onboarding.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

Use this skill when a periodic user access review is due, an auditor asked for access review evidence, or someone says "prepare the access review", "run the quarterly user recertification", "who still has admin", "check leavers still have access", "build the access review sheets for managers" or "our last review was a rubber stamp". Picks the systems in scope, builds account populations reconciled against HR, pre-flags leavers, orphans, shared and dormant accounts, assigns independent reviewers, defines the decisions to record, and plans the removal follow-up.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

Use this skill when staff already use AI assistants, coding tools or AI features and the company needs rules people will follow, and asks "write our AI usage policy", "can staff use ChatGPT", "generative AI policy", "what data can we put into AI tools", "approved AI tools list", "rules for AI agents and connectors" or "AI literacy for staff". Finds out what people actually use, sets a short list of approved tools with a data traffic light, rules for checking outputs and for agents that act, a fast route to request a new tool, and writes a two-page rule set, the approved tools list and rollout notes.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

Use this skill when a company must work out where each of its AI systems sits under the EU AI Act, and asks "is this high-risk", "classify our AI systems", "AI Act risk tier", "are we a provider or a deployer", "does Annex III apply to us", "is this a prohibited practice", "what does the AI Act mean for our chatbot" or "which AI Act obligations do we have". Tests each system, one at a time, for scope, role, prohibited practices, the two high-risk routes, the narrow exemption, transparency duties and general-purpose models, and writes a reasoned classification record per system plus a summary table of resulting obligations to confirm with whoever owns legal interpretation.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

Use this skill when one AI system needs its impact on people and on the company assessed before launch, after a significant change, or because a customer, auditor or regulator asks for it, and the team says "AI impact assessment", "assess the impact of this model", "fundamental rights impact assessment", "who could this AI harm", "bias assessment before launch" or "sign-off for the AI feature". Describes the system in its context, works through impacts on the people it affects with evidence, sizes them, proposes mitigations with measurable triggers, and writes one assessment ready for the system owner and an accountable executive to sign.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

Use this skill when a company that already runs a security management system wants to add an AI management system, or is preparing for an AI governance certification, and asks "scope our AI management system", "what should the AIMS cover", "AI governance roles", "who owns AI governance", "extend our ISMS to AI" or "write the AI management system scope statement". Decides which AI systems, roles, teams and lifecycle stages are in, maps interfaces and dependencies, reuses the processes the security system already runs, assigns roles with a RACI, and writes the scope statement, the roles file and the open questions for leadership.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

better-isms/grcskills102026年10月20日 更新

查看 better-isms 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题