What should you advise this company regarding the status of security cameras at their offices in the United States?

SCENARIO

Please use the following to answer the next QUESTION:

Perhaps Jack Kelly should have stayed in the U.S. He enjoys a formidable reputation inside the company, Special Handling Shipping, for his work in reforming certain "rogue" offices. Last year, news broke that a police sting operation had revealed a drug ring operating in the Providence, Rhode Island office in the United States. Video from the office’s video surveillance cameras leaked to news operations showed a drug exchange between Special Handling staff and undercover officers.

In the wake of this incident, Kelly had been sent to Providence to change the "hands off" culture that upper management believed had let the criminal elements conduct their illicit transactions. After a few weeks under Kelly’s direction, the office became a model of efficiency and customer service. Kelly monitored his workers’ activities using the same cameras that had recorded the illegal conduct of their former co-workers.

Now Kelly has been charged with turning around the office in Cork, Ireland, another trouble spot. The company has received numerous reports of the staff leaving the office unattended. When Kelly arrived, he found that even when present, the staff often spent their days socializing or conducting personal business on their mobile phones. Again, he observed their behaviors using surveillance cameras. He issued written reprimands to six staff members based on the first day of video alone.

Much to Kelly’s surprise and chagrin, he and the company are now under investigation by the Data Protection Commissioner of Ireland for allegedly violating the privacy rights of employees. Kelly was told that the company’s license for the cameras listed facility security as their main use, but he does not know why this matters. He has pointed out to his superiors that the company’s training programs on privacy protection and data collection mention nothing about surveillance video.

You are a privacy protection consultant, hired by the company to assess this incident, report on the legal and compliance issues, and recommend next steps.

What should you advise this company regarding the status of security cameras at their offices in the United States?
A . Add security cameras at facilities that are now without them.
B . Set policies about the purpose and use of the security cameras.
C . Reduce the number of security cameras located inside the building.
D . Restrict access to surveillance video taken by the security cameras and destroy the recordings after a designated period of time.

View Answer

Answer: D

Explanation:

This answer is the best way to advise this company regarding the status of security cameras at their offices in the United States, as it can help to protect the privacy and security of the employees and visitors who are recorded by the cameras, as well as to comply with any applicable laws and regulations that may limit or regulate the use of surveillance video. Restricting access to surveillance video means that only authorized personnel who have a legitimate business need can view, copy, share or disclose the video, and that they must follow proper procedures and safeguards to prevent unauthorized or unlawful access, use or disclosure. Destroying the recordings after a designated period of time means that the video is not kept longer than necessary for the purpose for which it was collected, and that it is disposed of securely and irreversibly. The designated period of time should be based on the legal, operational and risk factors that may affect the retention of the video, such as potential litigation, investigations, audits or claims.

Reference: IAPP CIPM Study Guide, page 831; ISO/IEC 27002:2013, section 8.3.2