Data Protection Impact Assessment · Photo archive recognition
DPIA-2026-001 · DraftProject overview
State the processing in plain language. Who, where, what is being indexed, and what changes once Ansikt is in place. Keep it under one page; an auditor reads this section first.
Necessity & proportionality
Why face recognition rather than a less invasive method. Article 5(1)(c) — data minimisation — requires you to consider alternatives and document why they were rejected.
Lawful basis
Biometric data identifying a natural person is a special category under Article 9. Standard Article 6 grounds are insufficient on their own — you need an Article 9(2) condition as well.
Data flows
Each hop, with protocol and jurisdiction. The architecture diagram on /security can be used verbatim. Tell the auditor what is stored, where, and for how long.
Risks to data subjects
The five risks Datatilsynet specifically asks about, with default ratings for an Ansikt deployment. Adjust to your context; a risk register that says "all low" gets an audit flag of its own.
Mitigations
The control mapping. Each risk above must reference at least one mitigation here. Prefer technical controls; document organisational ones too.
Consultation
Article 35(9) requires you to seek the views of data subjects "where appropriate." Document who you consulted, what you heard, and what you changed.
Sign-off
Three signatures, three dates. Without all three, the DPIA is a draft. Re-review on a fixed schedule and whenever the processing materially changes.