Exin PDPF Exam - Topic 4 Question 45 Discussion

Actual exam question for Exin's PDPF exam

Question #: 45
Topic #: 4

The Traffic Department of a city wants to know how many cars travel daily in order to plan the number of spaces needed to implement a rotating parking system.

To do this, cameras were installed at strategic points. Through image recognition software it is possible to capture the license plate and know how many cars traveled in the city. A monthly report is issued with the average number of cars present each day.

Signs and posters were spread around the city informing drivers and citizens what is the purpose of processing and that the data will be stored for up to five years, for future comparison.

What basic principle of legitimate processing of personal data is being violated in this case?

APersonal data must be kept in a way that allows the identification of data subjects for a period not longer than necessary.

BPersonal data must be processed transparently in relation to the data subject.

CPersonal data must be processed in a way that guarantees the appropriate security of personal data.

DPersonal data must be collected for specific, explicit and legitimate purposes and must not be further processed for incompatible purposes.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

Data protection and privacy are complementary, but not the same thing.

A very repeated phrase is: ''It is possible to have security without privacy, but it is not possible to have privacy without security''.

Privacy is a right that must be protected, and Data Protection are the measures that will be used to achieve this protection.

by Fletcher at Jul 25, 2023, 07:30 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PDPF Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

James

5 months ago

I think it's fine as long as they inform everyone.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rebecka

5 months ago

This is definitely a violation of data retention principles.

upvoted 0 times

...

Oliva

5 months ago

Wait, are they really storing that info for five years? Sounds sketchy.

upvoted 0 times

...

Hershel

6 months ago

I agree, five years is excessive for just tracking cars.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fausto

6 months ago

Seems like they're keeping data way too long!

upvoted 0 times

...

Lindsay

6 months ago

I’m torn between A and D. A seems to fit because of the five-year retention, but D also makes sense since they need a clear purpose for collecting the data in the first place.

upvoted 0 times

...

Peggy

6 months ago

I practiced a similar question where the focus was on the purpose of data collection. I think option D might be the right answer since it mentions specific and legitimate purposes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Heike

6 months ago

I'm a bit unsure, but I feel like the transparency aspect might be relevant too. They did inform people, but is that enough?

upvoted 0 times

...

Viki

6 months ago

I think the key issue here is about how long they keep the data. I remember something about not retaining personal data longer than necessary.

upvoted 0 times

...

Earnestine

7 months ago

Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. I know we can use variables, but I'm not sure if that's the only way. I'll have to think this through carefully.

upvoted 0 times

...

Flo

7 months ago

Okay, I've got a strategy here. Since the app uses local SSDs for caching, I'll want to make sure that's encrypted. And for the instance-to-instance communications, switching from UDP to TCP and using BoringSSL seems like a good way to secure that.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gilma

7 months ago

I'm a bit confused on the best approach here. Should I be converting the images to TensorFlow objects or using TFRecords? I'll need to review the Google recommendations carefully.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shenika

11 months ago

You know, with all this license plate data, the city could probably start a whole new business - 'License to Thrill' limo rentals. Just saying, they might be onto something here.

upvoted 0 times

Terrilyn

10 months ago

They should make sure to only use the data for what they said they would.

upvoted 0 times

...

Oliva

10 months ago

I agree, they are collecting data for one purpose but might end up using it for something else.

upvoted 0 times

...

Van

10 months ago

I think option D is being violated here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Christene

11 months ago

Hey, at least the city is being upfront about the surveillance. Imagine if they tried to hide it and got caught - talk about a 'traffic jam' in the courts!

upvoted 0 times

...

Ceola

11 months ago

Hah, this is like a real-life episode of Minority Report. The city is tracking everyone's movements for the next 5 years? Sounds like a dystopian nightmare to me. I'm giving this one to D, just to be on the safe side.

upvoted 0 times

Shenika

10 months ago

D) Personal data must be collected for specific, explicit and legitimate purposes and must not be further processed for incompatible purposes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ronny

10 months ago

C) Personal data must be processed in a way that guarantees the appropriate security of personal data.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kirk

10 months ago

B) Personal data must be processed transparently in relation to the data subject.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jaime

11 months ago

A) Personal data must be kept in a way that allows the identification of data subjects for a period not longer than necessary.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shantell

11 months ago

I'm gonna go with A. Keeping that data for 5 years? That's a long time to identify individual drivers. I bet the city traffic cops are just looking for an excuse to pull people over. Where's the transparency in that?

upvoted 0 times

Graciela

10 months ago

C) Yeah, transparency is definitely lacking in this situation. They should be more upfront about how long they're keeping the data.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jamal

10 months ago

B) I agree, it seems like a violation of privacy to keep that data for so long.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rickie

10 months ago

A) Personal data must be kept in a way that allows the identification of data subjects for a period not longer than necessary.

upvoted 0 times

...

Roslyn

1 year ago

Definitely D. Collecting license plate data for 5 years seems way longer than necessary to plan parking spaces. Plus, they could use that data for other, incompatible purposes down the line. Not cool, Traffic Department.

upvoted 0 times

Verdell

10 months ago

The Traffic Department should reconsider their data retention policy.

upvoted 0 times

...

Peggie

10 months ago

It's important to respect the principle of collecting data for specific and legitimate purposes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gianna

10 months ago

Yeah, they should only collect data for the specific purpose of planning parking spaces.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kara

10 months ago

I agree, keeping the data for 5 years seems excessive.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jeanice

10 months ago

The Traffic Department should reconsider their data retention policy.

upvoted 0 times

...

Leota

10 months ago

It's important to respect the principle of collecting data for specific purposes.

upvoted 0 times

...

Brittney

10 months ago

Yeah, they should only use it for the purpose they stated.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rolland

11 months ago

I agree, keeping the data for 5 years seems excessive.

upvoted 0 times

...

Cordie

1 year ago

This is a tricky one. I'm pretty sure the answer is B, but the city seems to be doing a decent job of informing the public about the data processing. Maybe they could do better with transparency, but it's not a clear violation in my opinion.

upvoted 0 times