Skip to content

ISO/IEC 27701 and GDPR — integration guide

GDPR sets binding legal obligations on EU controllers and processors. ISO/IEC 27701 gives those obligations a management-system structure — scope, role determination, risk method, control execution, evidence, audit, review. This page covers how the PIMS operationalises GDPR work and how Modulos lets a single evidence file support both at once.

Quick decision

  • You need ISO 27701 to "cover" GDPR → it doesn't, and no voluntary standard can. The PIMS is a management-system layer that operationalises the substance of GDPR obligations; the binding legal obligations remain GDPR.
  • You need to show a regulator how the PIMS aligns with GDPR → point to Annex D (informative mapping from PIMS clauses + Annex A / Annex B controls to GDPR Articles).
  • You need to run a GDPR Article 35 DPIA → the DPIA is GDPR-driven; its output feeds Clause 6.1.2 / 6.1.3 in the PIMS. In Modulos store the DPIA as evidence on ORF-264 (org) and MRF-243 (AI system).
  • You want to reuse evidence across ISO 27001, ISO 27701 and GDPR → Annex SL Clauses 4–10 are shared; privacy evidence (DPIA, RoPA, breach records) maps to PIMS clauses and GDPR Articles simultaneously.

TL;DR

  • GDPR is binding law; ISO 27701 is a voluntary management-system standard. The PIMS gives GDPR a management-system structure, not a legal substitute.
  • Annex D is the canonical informative mapping from PIMS to GDPR Articles. Use it as the audit-trail reference, not as a compliance claim.
  • DPIA (Article 35) lives inside Clause 6.1.2 / 6.1.3. The DPIA is triggered, processing-specific; the PIMS risk method is continuous.
  • Controller / processor distinction matches GDPR Articles 4(7) / 4(8). Annex A applies to controller activities, Annex B to processor activities.
  • Evidence reuses across ISO 27001 + 27701 + GDPR. One file, many links. Modulos models this through control-level evidence references.

Primary source

ISO/IEC 27701:2025Privacy information management — Requirements and guidance, Annex D (informative GDPR mapping). Withdrawn prior edition: ISO/IEC 27701:2019. Available via the ISO Online Browsing Platform. © ISO. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) — binding regulation; primary source at eur-lex.europa.eu.

What the PIMS gives a GDPR programme

GDPR obligationPIMS clause / controlWhat the PIMS adds
Article 5 principlesClause 5.2 privacy policy + Clause 6.2 objectivesDocumented, reviewed, communicated principles statement
Article 6 lawful basisClause 6.1.2 + 6.1.3 + Annex A.7.2.xLawful-basis determination per processing activity
Article 24 controller obligationsAnnex A (controllers)Structured controller-side control set
Article 28 processor obligationsAnnex B (processors)Structured processor-side control set; sub-processor governance
Article 30 RoPAClause 8.1 operational planningRoPA entries as control-level evidence
Article 32 security of processingAnnex A.6.x / B.6.x; cross-mapped to ISO 27001 Annex ASecurity controls shared with the ISMS
Articles 33–34 breach notificationAnnex A.5.x / B.5.xBreach process with timing evidence
Article 35 DPIAClause 6.1.2 + 6.1.3 + DPIA evidence on ORF-264 / MRF-243DPIA outputs flow into the PIMS risk method
Articles 12–22 data-subject rightsAnnex A.7.3.xRights-handling process with statutory-deadline evidence
Articles 44–49 transfersAnnex A.7.5.x / B.8.5.xCross-border transfer impact assessment + safeguards

What the PIMS does not give you: a binding legal compliance verdict. The PIMS shows that the organisation operates a privacy management system that addresses GDPR substance. Whether a specific processing activity complies with a specific GDPR Article remains a legal question, not a certification question.

Controller vs processor — same distinction, two standards

ISO 27701 and GDPR use the same controller / processor model. The standards line up:

ConceptGDPRISO/IEC 27701
ControllerArticle 4(7)PII controller; Annex A applies
ProcessorArticle 4(8)PII processor; Annex B applies
Joint controllersArticle 26Documented role determination per Clause 4.3
Sub-processorsArticle 28(2)–(4)Annex B + supplier governance (Clause 8.1)

Operating practice: per processing activity, determine the role and document it in the PIMS scope (ORF-258). Then apply Annex A or Annex B per activity. A single organisation typically operates both.

DPIA inside the PIMS

The Article 35 DPIA is a GDPR instrument. Inside the PIMS:

  • Trigger — Article 35(1) criteria (high risk to rights and freedoms), Article 35(3) examples, supervisory-authority blacklists.
  • Method — re-uses the Clause 6.1.2 privacy risk method; the DPIA is one instantiation of that method applied to a specific processing activity.
  • Output — feeds Clause 6.1.3 (risk treatment) and may require Article 36 prior consultation if residual high risk remains.
  • In Modulos — DPIA records stored as control-level evidence on ORF-264 (org-level method) and on MRF-243 (AI-system-level instance). Updates to the DPIA over the AI lifecycle are versioned through the same control / evidence model.

The pattern avoids the common failure mode of running DPIA work as a parallel process that the PIMS audit can't see.

Annex D — informative mapping

Annex D of ISO/IEC 27701 maps PIMS clauses and Annex A / Annex B controls to GDPR Articles. It is informative — the certification body does not certify against it — but it is the canonical reference for showing how the PIMS supports GDPR.

How to use Annex D in Modulos:

  • treat Annex D as the audit-trail reference between PIMS evidence and GDPR Articles
  • store the Annex D mapping (an internal version maintained against the ISO publication) as control-level evidence on ORF-275 (operational planning) or ORF-272 (documented information)
  • when supervisory-authority inquiries arrive, the Annex D mapping points the regulator directly to the PIMS evidence backing the relevant Article

Evidence reuse — one file, many references

The integration pattern that pays off across ISO 27001, ISO 27701 and GDPR:

Mechanics in Modulos:

  • Create one privacy artefact (DPIA, RoPA entry, breach record, vendor DPA, transfer-impact assessment).
  • Link it as evidence to each relevant requirement on each relevant template (OFF-9 ISMS, OFF-12 PIMS, GDPR control mappings).
  • Each linked controls keeps its own approvals and residual-risk decisions, so the auditor or supervisory authority can follow the thread from artefact to obligation to decision.

The point is not "save effort" — it's that the same fact (the DPIA, the breach decision, the supplier assessment) should be the answer everywhere the question is asked.

How to operationalise GDPR integration in Modulos

Modulos requirementGDPR / PIMS evidence
ORF-258PIMS scope + controller / processor role determination linked to GDPR Articles 4(7) / 4(8) / 26
ORF-264Privacy risk assessment and DPIA evidence for Article 35
ORF-265Privacy risk treatment and Annex A / Annex B selection (Articles 24 / 28)
ORF-272 / ORF-275Annex D mapping, RoPA, transfer-impact assessments (Articles 30 / 44–49)
MRF-243AI-system privacy risk assessment / DPIA evidence
MRF-244AI-system privacy risk treatment evidence

Cross-framework mapping (preview)

ISO 27701 elementGDPR ArticleAdjacent ISO
Clause 4.3 scope + role determinationArticles 4(7) / 4(8) / 26ISO 27001 Clause 4.3 scope
Clause 6.1.2 privacy risk assessmentArticle 35 DPIA (triggered)ISO 27001 Clause 6.1.2
Annex A (controllers)Article 24
Annex B (processors)Articles 28(2)–(4)
Annex A.6.x / B.6.x securityArticle 32ISO 27001 Annex A (normative)
Annex A.5.x / B.5.x breach processArticles 33–34ISO 27001 Annex A.5.24–A.5.28
Annex A.7.5.x / B.8.5.x transfersArticles 44–49
Clause 9.2 internal auditISO 27001 / 42001 Clause 9.2
Clause 9.3 management reviewISO 27001 / 42001 Clause 9.3

Source attribution

ISO/IEC 27701:2025Privacy information management — Requirements and guidance, Annex D (informative mapping to GDPR Articles). © ISO/IEC. Available via the ISO Online Browsing Platform. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR) — Articles 4, 5, 6, 24, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 44–49. Primary source: eur-lex.europa.eu.

Disclaimer

This page is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal or certification advice.