Patent Issued for Data processing and scanning systems for assessing vendor risk (USPTO 11138299): OneTrust LLC

2021 OCT 25 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Insurance Daily News -- A patent by the inventors Barday, Kabir A. (Atlanta, GA, US), Brannon, Jonathan Blake (Smyrna, GA, US), Jones, Kevin (Atlanta, GA, US), Sabourin, Jason L. (Brookhaven, GA, US), Shah, Milap (Bangalore, IN), Viswanathan, Subramanian (Marietta, GA, US), filed on April 30, 2020, was published online on October 5, 2021, according to news reporting originating from Alexandria, Virginia, by NewsRx correspondents.

Patent number 11138299 is assigned to OneTrust LLC (Atlanta, Georgia, United States).

The following quote was obtained by the news editors from the background information supplied by the inventors: “Over the past years, privacy and security policies, and related operations have become increasingly important. Breaches in security, leading to the unauthorized access of personal data (which may include sensitive personal data) have become more frequent among companies and other organizations of all sizes. Such personal data may include, but is not limited to, personally identifiable information (PII), which may be information that directly (or indirectly) identifies an individual or entity. Examples of PII include names, addresses, dates of birth, social security numbers, and biometric identifiers such as a person’s fingerprints or picture. Other personal data may include, for example, customers’ Internet browsing habits, purchase history, or even their preferences (e.g., likes and dislikes, as provided or obtained through social media).

“Many organizations that obtain, use, and transfer personal data, including sensitive personal data, have begun to address these privacy and security issues. To manage personal data, many companies have attempted to implement operational policies and processes that comply with legal requirements, such as Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) or the U.S.’s Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) protecting a patient’s medical information. Many regulators recommend conducting privacy impact assessments, or data protection risk assessments along with data inventory mapping. For example, the GDPR requires data protection impact assessments. Additionally, the United Kingdom ICO’s office provides guidance around privacy impact assessments. The OPC in Canada recommends certain personal information inventory practices, and the Singapore PDPA specifically mentions personal data inventory mapping.

“In implementing these privacy impact assessments, an individual may provide incomplete or incorrect information regarding personal data to be collected, for example, by new software, a new device, or a new business effort, for example, to avoid being prevented from collecting that personal data, or to avoid being subject to more frequent or more detailed privacy audits. In light of the above, there is currently a need for improved systems and methods for monitoring compliance with corporate privacy policies and applicable privacy laws in order to reduce a likelihood that an individual will successfully “game the system” by providing incomplete or incorrect information regarding current or future uses of personal data.

“Organizations that obtain, use, and transfer personal data often work with other organizations (“vendors”) that provide services and/or products to the organizations. Organizations working with vendors may be responsible for ensuring that any personal data to which their vendors may have access is handled properly. However, organizations may have limited control over vendors and limited insight into their internal policies and procedures. Therefore, there is currently a need for improved systems and methods that help organizations ensure that their vendors handle personal data properly.”

In addition to the background information obtained for this patent, NewsRx journalists also obtained the inventors’ summary information for this patent: “A computer-implemented data processing method for monitoring one or more system inputs as input of information related to a privacy campaign, according to various embodiments, comprises: (A) actively monitoring, by one or more processors, one or more system inputs from a user as the user provides information related to a privacy campaign, the one or more system inputs comprising one or more submitted inputs and one or more unsubmitted inputs, wherein actively monitoring the one or more system inputs comprises: (1) recording a first keyboard entry provided within a graphical user interface that occurs prior to submission of the one or more system inputs by the user, and (2) recording a second keyboard entry provided within the graphical user interface that occurs after the user inputs the first keyboard entry and before the user submits the one or more system inputs; (B) storing, in computer memory, by one or more processors, an electronic record of the one or more system inputs; (C) analyzing, by one or more processors, the one or more submitted inputs and one or more unsubmitted inputs to determine one or more changes to the one or more system inputs prior to submission, by the user, of the one or more system inputs, wherein analyzing the one or more submitted inputs and the one or more unsubmitted inputs to determine the one or more changes to the one or more system inputs comprises comparing the first keyboard entry with the second keyboard entry to determine one or more differences between the one or more submitted inputs and the one or more unsubmitted inputs, wherein the first keyboard entry is an unsubmitted input and the second keyboard entry is a submitted input; (D) determining, by one or more processors, based at least in part on the one or more system inputs and the one or more changes to the one or more system inputs, whether the user has provided one or more system inputs comprising one or more abnormal inputs; and (E) at least partially in response to determining that the user has provided one or more abnormal inputs, automatically flagging the one or more system inputs that comprise the one or more abnormal inputs in memory.

“A computer-implemented data processing method for monitoring a user as the user provides one or more system inputs as input of information related to a privacy campaign, in various embodiments, comprises: (A) actively monitoring, by one or more processors, (i) a user context of the user as the user provides the one or more system inputs as information related to the privacy campaign and (ii) one or more system inputs from the user, the one or more system inputs comprising one or more submitted inputs and one or more unsubmitted inputs, wherein actively monitoring the user context and the one or more system inputs comprises recording a first user input provided within a graphical user interface that occurs prior to submission of the one or more system inputs by the user, and recording a second user input provided within the graphical user interface that occurs after the user inputs the first user input and before the user submits the one or more system input; (B) storing, in computer memory, by one or more processors, an electronic record of user context of the user and the one or more system inputs from the user; (C) analyzing, by one or more processors, at least one item of information selected from a group consisting of (i) the user context and (ii) the one or more system inputs from the user to determine whether abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs, wherein determining whether the abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs comprises comparing the first user input with the second user input to determine one or more differences between the one or more submitted inputs and the one or more unsubmitted inputs, wherein the first user input is an unsubmitted input and the second user input is a submitted input; and (D) at least partially in response to determining that abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs, automatically flagging, in memory, at least a portion of the provided one or more system inputs in which the abnormal user behavior occurred.

“A computer-implemented data processing method for monitoring a user as the user provides one or more system inputs as input of information related to a privacy campaign, in various embodiments, comprises: (A) actively monitoring, by one or more processors, a user context of the user as the user provides the one or more system inputs, the one or more system inputs comprising one or more submitted inputs and one or more unsubmitted inputs, wherein actively monitoring the user context of the user as the user provides the one more system inputs comprises recording a first user input provided within a graphical user interface that occurs prior to submission of the one or more system inputs by the user, and recording a second user input provided within the graphical user interface that occurs after the user provides the first user input and before the user submits the one or more system inputs, wherein the user context comprises at least one user factor selected from a group consisting of: (i) an amount of time the user takes to provide the one or more system inputs, (ii) a deadline associated with providing the one or more system inputs, (iii) a location of the user as the user provides the one or more system inputs; and (iv) one or more electronic activities associated with an electronic device on which the user is providing the one or more system inputs; (B) storing, in computer memory, by one or more processors, an electronic record of the user context of the user; (C) analyzing, by one or more processors, the user context, based at least in part on the at least one user factor, to determine whether abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs, wherein determining whether the abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs comprises comparing the first user input with the second user input to determine one or more differences between the first user input and the second user input, wherein the first user input is an unsubmitted input and the second user input is a submitted input; and (D) at least partially in response to determining that abnormal user behavior occurred in providing the one or more system inputs, automatically flagging, in memory, at least a portion of the provided one or more system inputs in which the abnormal user behavior occurred.

“A computer-implemented data processing method for scanning one or more webpages to determine vendor risk, in various embodiments, comprises: (A) scanning, by one or more processors, one or more webpages associated with a vendor; (B) identifying, by one or more processors, one or more vendor attributes based on the scan; (C) calculating a vendor risk score based at least in part on the one or more vendor attributes; and (D) taking one or more automated actions based on the vendor risk rating.

“A computer-implemented data processing method for generating an incident notification for a vendor, according to particular embodiments, comprises: receiving, by one or more processors, an indication of a particular incident; determining, by one or more processors based on the indication of the particular incident, one or more attributes of the particular incident; determining, by one or more processors based on the one or more attributes of the particular incident, a vendor associated with the particular incident; determining, by one or more processors based on the vendor associated with the particular incident, a notification obligation for the vendor associated with the particular incident; generating, by one or more processors in response to determining the notification obligation, a task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; presenting, by one or more processors on a graphical user interface, an indication of the task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; detecting, by one or more processors on a graphical user interface, a selection of the indication of the task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; and presenting, by one or more processors on a graphical user interface, detailed information associated with the task associated with satisfying the notification obligation.”

The claims supplied by the inventors are:

“1. A computer-implemented method, the method comprising: receiving, by computer hardware, an indication of a particular data incident affecting particular data involving a first affected data asset, wherein the first affected data asset comprises at least one of a software or a hardware used for at least one of collecting, processing, storing, or transferring the particular data; determining, by the computer hardware, a scope of the particular data incident based at least in part on the breach of the particular data involving the first data asset; determining, by the computer hardware using a data source of data incident information, a risk level of the particular data incident based at least in part on the scope of the particular data incident; identifying, by the computer hardware based at least in part on the first affected data asset, a data map that comprises a plurality of data models representing the first affected data asset and other data assets and identifies electronic associations between the first affected data asset and the other data assets, wherein: each electronic association represents a respective flow of data between the first affected data asset and a respective other data asset, the plurality of data models comprises a data model representing a second affected data asset and comprising (i) a vendor attribute for the second affected data asset and (ii) an inventory attribute for the second affected data asset, the data map identifies an electronic association representing a flow of the particular data between the first affected data asset and the second affected data asset, and the second affected data asset comprises at least one of a second software or a second hardware used for at least one of collecting, processing, storing, or transferring the particular data; determining, by the computer hardware, based on the vendor attribute for the second affected data asset, that the vendor is associated with the particular data incident; determining, by the computer hardware, based on the risk level of the particular data incident and at least one of the vendor attribute or the inventory attribute, a notification obligation for the vendor associated with the particular data incident; generating, by the computer hardware, at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; providing, by the computer hardware, a graphical user interface for display to a user, wherein the graphical user interface is configured to display an indication of the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; causing, by the computer hardware, performance of the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; determining, by the computer hardware, that the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation has been completed; and causing, by the computer hardware, the indication to display that the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation has been completed on the graphical user interface.

“2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 further comprising: determining, by the computer hardware, a type of the particular data incident, wherein the type of the particular data incident is selected from a group consisting of: (a) a privacy incident; (b) a security incident; and © a data breach; and determining, by the computer hardware, the notification obligation for the vendor is based at least in part on the determined type of the particular data incident.

“3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the one or more attributes of the particular data incident comprises determining a region or country associated with the particular data incident.

“4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the one or more attributes of the particular data incident comprises determining a method by which the indication of the particular data incident was generated.

“5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising generating at least one additional task based at least in part on determining that the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation has been completed.

“6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein: the graphical user interface further comprises a user-selectable object associated with the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation; and causing performance of the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation further comprises: receiving an indication of a selection of the user-selectable object; and at least partially in response to receiving the indication of the selection of the user-selectable object, determining that the at least one task associated with satisfying the notification obligation has been completed.

“7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the particular data incident is selected from a group consisting of: (a) an event; (b) a security incident; © a privacy incident; and (d) a data breach.

“8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the affected data asset comprises at least one of a software application, a computing device, database, or a website.

“9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the inventory attribute comprises at least one of a data processing activity, a transfer of data, or a piece of personal data.

“10. An incident notification generation system comprising: computer hardware; and computer memory including computer-executable instructions configured to, when executed by the computer hardware, cause the system to at least: receive an indication of a particular data incident affecting particular data involving a first affected data asset, wherein the first affected data asset comprises at least one of a software or a hardware used for at least one of collecting, processing, storing, or transferring the particular data; determine an attribute of the particular data incident, wherein the attribute of the particular data incident is selected from a group consisting of: (a) a geographical region associated with the particular data incident; (b) a number of data subjects associated with the particular data incident; © a date and time associated with the particular data incident; (d) a first affected data asset associated with the incident; and determine a risk level of the particular data incident based at least in part on the attribute of the particular data incident; identify, based at least in part on the first affected data asset, a data map that comprises a plurality of data models representing the first affected data asset and other data assets and identifies electronic associations between the first affected data asset and the other data assets, wherein: each electronic association represents a respective flow of data between the first affected data asset and a respective other data asset, the plurality of models comprises a data model representing a second affected data asset and comprising (i) a vendor attribute for the second affected data asset and (ii) an inventory attribute for the second affected data asset, the data map identifies an electronic association representing a flow of the particular data between the first affected data asset and the second affected data asset, and the second affected data asset comprises at least one of a second software or a second hardware used for at least one of collecting, processing, storing, or transferring the particular data; determine a vendor associated with the particular data incident based on the vendor attribute for the second affected data asset; based on at least one of the vendor attribute or the inventory attribute and the risk level of the particular data incident, determine a notification obligation for the vendor; generate at least one task associated with the notification obligation for the vendor; cause at least one action to be performed associated with the at least one task associated with the notification obligation for the vendor; and provide a graphical user interface for display to a user, wherein the graphical user interface is configured to display an indication of the at least one task associated with the notification obligation for the vendor.

“11. The incident notification generation system of claim 10, wherein the computer-executable instructions are configured to, when executed by the computer hardware, cause the system to at least: analyze the attribute of the particular data incident to determine a scope of the particular data incident, wherein determining the notification obligation for the vendor is further based at least in part on the scope of the particular data incident.

“12. The incident notification generation system of claim 10, wherein: the indication of the at least one task associated with the notification obligation for the vendor comprises a user-selectable indication of the at least one task; and the computer-executable instructions are configured to, when executed by the computer hardware, cause the system to at least: detect a selection of the user-selectable indication of the at least one task; at least partially in response to detecting the selection of the user-selectable indication of the at least one task, cause a user-selectable indication of task completion to be presented, the user-selectable indication of task completion comprising an indicia that, when selected, indicates that the at least one task associated with the notification obligation for the vendor has been completed; detect a selection of the user-selectable indication of task completion; and at least partially in response to detecting the selection of the user-selectable indication of task completion, store an indication that the notification obligation for the vendor is satisfied.”

There are additional claims. Please visit full patent to read further.

URL and more information on this patent, see: Barday, Kabir A. Data processing and scanning systems for assessing vendor risk. U.S. Patent Number 11138299, filed April 30, 2020, and published online on October 5, 2021. Patent URL: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=11138299.PN.&OS=PN/11138299RS=PN/11138299

(Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world.)