<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Assessing and Improving Compliance to Privacy Regulations in Business Processes</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Jake Tom Supervisors: Raimundas Matulevicius</string-name>
          <email>jaketom@ut.ee</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Peeter Laud</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Institute of Computer Science, J. Liivi 2 University of Tartu - 50409</institution>
          ,
          <country country="EE">Estonia</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>55</fpage>
      <lpage>63</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Personal data privacy is emerging as an area of signi cant interest in recent years as more regions adopt data protection regulations in an e ort to protect the rights of consumers. Organizations are in need of novel approaches to upgrade their business processes to make them compliant with these regulations. However, current research towards privacy management is tailored towards the development of new processes from the ground up and little is done to address the assessment and improvement of existing processes. This PhD thesis proposes two artifact-based techniques to evaluate compliance to privacy regulations and capture privacy properties in business processes within the context of a new privacy management approach.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Business process management</kwd>
        <kwd>Privacy management</kwd>
        <kwd>BPMN</kwd>
        <kwd>Business process compliance</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Personal data privacy has garnered increasing attention over recent years.
Frequent and large scale breaches of sensitive data around the world [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ] indicate
that organizations have not yet fully prioritized private data protection. The
last decade has seen the introduction and strengthening of data protection laws
in several countries [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ]. In Europe, the General Data Protection Regulation
(GDPR) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] will replace the Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC)
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] from from May, 2018. Such regulations levy heavy penalties upon
organizations that fail to adequately ensure security and o er transparency into their
data processing activities. In addition, the EU-US Privacy Shield [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ] enforces
privacy guidelines upon companies in the USA that process the data of European
citizens. Organizations that intend to implement privacy controls through either
business process modi cations or the implementation of privacy-enhancing
technologies (PETs) require techniques to assess and improve the current state of
their processes. A study of research in this area reveals several approaches and
methods to assist the development of new processes that support desired
privacy guarantees (e.g. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]). However, further work is required to develop
approaches aimed at the improvement of existing processes.
      </p>
      <p>The objective of the thesis is to develop the foundations of an approach
for organizational privacy management with a focus on artifact-based Business
Process Model and Notation (BPMN) analysis techniques. For the sake of
practical relevance, this approach will be developed and validated with reference to
the GDPR. The primary research objective can be formulated as follows: How
can we assess and improve business process compliance to privacy regulations?
The results of this thesis - privacy extensions to BPMN and a meta-model of
the GDPR along with their usage within the intended approach, are aimed
towards the assessment and improvement of processes and information systems
within existing organizations. It should also be noted that the speci c domain
of this thesis is privacy management and not information security. While there
is an overlap between the two domains, we view security as de ned under the
Con dentiality-Integrity-Availability triad for expressing security objectives. On
the other hand, privacy deals with how sensitive information is obtained and
processed. Implementing security can mitigate certain privacy risks but may not
be the solution for them all.</p>
      <p>This paper describes the research goals of this PhD thesis and highlights its
contributions so far. It is structured as follows: Section 2 describes the intended
approach and the primary research objective is broken down into ve research
questions. Section 3 goes into the contributions made so far within the context
of the research methodology employed. Section 4 presents the focus areas for the
literature review and an overview of its results so far.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Research Objectives</title>
      <p>A proposed view of the approach is illustrated in Fig. 1. The gure is composed
of generic steps with their instantiations within this thesis described in smaller
boxes. For example, GDPR is an instantiation of Privacy Policy. The approach is
broadly composed of two phases:
1. Assessment: The goal of this phase is to identify areas of non-compliance
to the GDPR to arrive at a set of requirements to achieve compliance. This
identi cation is based on the comparison of two kinds of UML diagrams - (i )
a meta-model extracted from the contents of the GDPR that illustrate
compliance rules and (ii ) existing business processes of the organization under
evaluation documented in BPMN that are then converted into class diagrams
to provide a policy-oriented view of the processes. The GDPR meta-model
and its comparison techniques form one side of the thesis contribution.
2. Improvement: The goal of this phase is to produce process models that
are veri ably compliant to the GDPR. To express this, the output of the
assessment phase is converted into a set of requirements. These requirements
will fall under two categories - (i ) technological improvements and (ii )
process improvements. While process improvements are simply revisions to the
existing business processes in standard BPMN, technological improvements
that can be addressed using PETs cannot yet be adequately captured. This
provides the motivation for the development of extensions to the BPMN
language, labeled Privacy-Enhanced BPMN (PE-BPMN) which is another
contribution of this thesis.</p>
      <p>To develop such an approach and its components, the following research
questions (RQ) have to be addressed:
{ RQ1: What is the state of the art in business process assessment and
improvement with regards to privacy regulation compliance?
{ RQ2: What is a conceptual representation (meta-model) of the GDPR?
{ RQ3: How can the conceptual representation be validated?
{ RQ4: How can the BPMN language be extended to capture PETs?
{ RQ5: How can the PE-BPMN language extensions be validated?</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Research Methodology and Current Status</title>
      <p>The work accomplished during this rst year of study has been primarily focused
on the development and validation of privacy extensions to BPMN (RQ4, RQ5)
and secondarily, on evaluating the state of the art (RQ1). Preliminary
development of the GDPR meta-model is currently underway at the University of Tartu
which will soon be handed over for completion as part of this thesis (RQ2, RQ3).
3.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Design Science</title>
        <p>
          PE-BPMN [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] has been developed in line with the design science research
guidelines proposed by Hevner et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
          ]. The following list describes the state of the
thesis and future plans within the context of each guideline:
1. Design as an artifact: The techniques being developed in this thesis are
based on the production of speci c artifacts in the form of process
models with an extended BPMN syntax and meta-models drawn in UML. The
PE-BPMN language extension provides an approach (method) and syntax
(model) to capture PETs at multiple levels of abstraction in process models.
        </p>
        <p>
          The work on PE-BPMN is summarized in Section 3.2.
2. Problem relevance: The literature review in Section 4 has identi ed a
relative shortage of techniques to assess and improve existing business processes.
Additionally, while BPMN is particularly suited to capture the state of
processes around an existing information system, it is not suitable for capturing
technological privacy properties of the same. To be relevant in the privacy
domain, the BPMN standard requires extension.
3. Design evaluation: A prototype modeler for PE-BPMN extensions and
subsequent analysis has been implemented and is currently being validated
on case studies from the DARPA Brandeis program [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
          ].
4. Research contributions: The contribution of the thesis so far is the
PEBPMN language extension. It is intended that the GDPR meta-model and
its comparison methods will be completed and consolidated along with
PEBPMN into the proposed approach in Fig. 1.
5. Research rigor: PE-BPMN is based on BPMN and the GDPR meta-model
is based on UML which are accepted standards. PE-BPMN extends the
abstract and concrete syntax and semantics of BPMN 2.0. The addition of
semantics is based on existing PET taxonomies, the abstract syntax is an
extension of the existing model and the concrete syntax is based on best
practices of UML.
6. Design as a search process: The development of PE-BPMN is founded
on a review of the gaps identi ed in the current state of privacy modeling in
business processes (see Section 4.4). After its initial version was published,
the language was extended and re ned in a later iteration that added support
for modeling additional PETs as well as re nements to its foundations.
7. Communication of research: The paper on PE-BPMN [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] is presented
from a technical viewpoint directed at system analysts. While higher level
motivations for managerial audiences are provided to some degree, they are
not the focus. However, the broader scope of the thesis (i.e. the approach)
will be aimed at addressing concerns of managerial audiences as well.
3.2
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Privacy-Enhanced BPMN</title>
        <p>
          PE-BPMN, originally developed for another project aims to address the gap of
expressing technological privacy safeguards in business process models. It is also
directly applicable to solving related steps of the approach in Fig. 1. The paper
on PE-BPMN [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
          ] proposes a multi-leveled model of PET abstraction that, on one
level, views PETs in terms of their general targets, for example, data con
dentiality or user anonymity. This abstraction is expressed in process models using
language extensions called generic stereotypes. A process model de ned in terms
of generic stereotypes can then be used to advance to the next level of
abstraction where these generic stereotypes are instantiated with speci c PETs using
concrete stereotypes. In Fig. 2(a) we see how individual tasks related to a
mechanism that ensures data con dentiality are expressed with generic stereotypes. We
assume application of a protection mechanism (via ProtectCon dentiality),
computation on the protected data with a public input (via PETComputation and
nally, removal of the protection mechanism (via OpenCon dentiality. At this
stage, our process under consideration has achieved the goal of ensuring data
con dentiality. It is possible to take this further by instantiating the generic
stereotypes with concrete stereotypes as shown in Fig. 2(b) which describes the
application of public key encryption through equivalent tasks.
        </p>
        <p>
          Finally, it proposes a method to qualitatively analyze disclosures of
information that can potentially occur along a process described in PE-BPMN through
a set of disclosure matrices. A prototype demonstrating modeling with privacy
extensions, syntax veri cation and automated information disclosure analysis is
also presented. Pullonen et al. [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
          ] introduced the rst version of PE-BPMN
and described the PE-BPMN syntax and PET selection method. The
contribution of this thesis to PE-BPMN includes: (i ) The multi-leveled model of PET
abstraction, (ii ) the inclusion of additional PETs into the PE-BPMN syntax
and improvement of existing syntax and (iii ) the information disclosure analysis
method.
4
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Background and Related</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>Work</title>
      <p>Based on the goals and steps of the approach described in Fig. 1, the following
research areas have been identi ed for the literature review:
4.1</p>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>Privacy Regulations and their Implementation</title>
        <p>
          DLA Piper [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
          ] has developed a web application that provides an overview of
the strength of data protection regulations around the world. A review of works
related to evaluation and implementation of these regulations is currently
underway. It is focused particularly on those regions recognized as having robust
or heavy data protection laws as described in the application.
        </p>
        <p>
          Outside EU: The Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) introduced in Malaysia
in 2010 is a collection of categorized principles [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
          ] that regulate commercial
usage of personal data. The authors in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
          ] present the results of a case study
aimed at identifying the impact of the PET adoption after PDPA enforcement
on employee work performance. The results suggest that a holistic evaluation of
business process compliance to privacy regulations would include techniques to
measure PET adoption among employees and compliance to restructured
business processes. However, the discussion on techniques to manage the same is
limited.
        </p>
        <p>
          GDPR: In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
          ], the authors introduce an extended version of Socio-Technical
Security modeling language (STS-ml) to capture and verify the social aspects
of the GDPR such as the relationship between employers and employees and
consent. However, STS-ml does not yet capture technical aspects of the GDPR
such as data security measures and is most suitable for systems being
developed. A meta-model to illustrate key relationships between entities de ned in
the GDPR is proposed by the authors of [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
          ]. The meta-model is intended to
be used by the designers of e-services for the development of adequate Privacy
Level Agreements (PLAs) that demonstrate compliance to the GDPR.
4.2
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-2">
        <title>General Approaches for Regulation-Compliant System Design</title>
        <p>It is relevant to also consider work done with regards to IS design and
compliance to regulations that do not relate to privacy. At a more abstract level, any
regulation can be viewed as a set of constraints imposed upon a process. An
analysis of related work into regulation compliance outside privacy may yield
useful insights when studied from this perspective.</p>
        <p>
          In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
          ], the authors introduce a method that provides a high-level set of
guidelines to select appropriate measures to ensure regulatory compliance. A
framework to elicit security requirements from laws and regulations is proposed
by the authors of [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
          ]. While [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
          ] is not speci cally applied to GDPR and speaks
in terms of implementing any regulation, its high-level perspective provides some
guidance to IS designers conforming to legal requirements. The framework in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
          ]
could be adapted for some privacy requirements such as the concept of consent
in GDPR. The approach uses goal modeling to extract security requirements
which are then translated to a secure system design with Model Based Security
Engineering.
4.3
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-3">
        <title>Business Process Compliance Checking</title>
        <p>
          Business process compliance (BPC) checking has received substantial research
attention and there are several approaches towards it based on graph pattern
matching, computation tree logic and other computer science concepts. Pattern
based approaches to compliance checking are presented by the authors of [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ] and
[
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ]. In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
          ], the authors illustrate a method to extract a catalogue of compliance
patterns from a regulation that can then be compared against business processes
using a graph pattern-based compliance checking approach. In [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
          ] the authors use
security risk-oriented patterns applied to the ISO27001:2013 security standard
to check as well as improve process compliance.
4.4
        </p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-4">
        <title>Privacy Modeling in Business Processes</title>
        <p>
          There has been signi cant research into modeling security and privacy in BPMN.
BPMN has been adapted to the domain of security risk management and
security modeling extensions have been proposed by the authors of [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
          ], [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
          ] and [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
          ].
While these are applicable to security modeling which covers some aspects of
privacy management, they are not designed speci cally for privacy. Privacy-aware
BPMN and syntax extensions to capture speci c aspects of privacy concerns like
consent and access control are presented in [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
          ] and [
          <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
          ]. However, neither of them
address how to capture PETs in BPMN and identify privacy losses along the
process chain.
        </p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>Concluding Remarks</title>
      <p>In this paper, we provided the motivation, scope and approach for the PhD
thesis. While the focus of this thesis will be in the context of the GDPR, the
goal is to generalize the approach for achieving compliance with other
emerging privacy regulations as well. The main research question is broken down into
sub-questions that address the development and validation of the privacy
management techniques proposed in the thesis. The applied research methodology is
introduced and explained along with current progress. Then, the state of the art
is reviewed with respect to four identi ed areas of focus to motivate the thesis
and position it with regards to existing research.</p>
      <p>
        As for future work, while a preliminary evaluation of the state of the art
(RQ1) has been done, the review needs to be completed, potentially using a
systematic literature review method. The GDPR meta-model (RQ2, RQ3)
remains to be developed and then validated on case studies within the DARPA
Brandeis [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
        ] program - a collective research e ort aimed at the development
of techniques to preserve privacy while analyzing large amounts of sensitive
information across varied industries. We plan to elicit feedback on the artifacts
and the general approach from program managers through direct interviews and
qualitative surveys from other program members.
      </p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>EU</given-names>
            <surname>General Data Protection Regulation</surname>
          </string-name>
          , http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/ document/ST-5419
          <string-name>
            <surname>-</surname>
          </string-name>
          2016-INIT/en/pdf
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Angelopoulos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Diamantopoulou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mouratidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pavlidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A Metamodel for GDPR-based Privacy Level Agreements</article-title>
          . ER Forum/Demos (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <source>Personal Data Protection Act</source>
          <year>2010</year>
          , Malaysia, http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/ uploads/files/Publications/LOM/EN/Act%20709%
          <year>2014</year>
          %
          <volume>206</volume>
          %
          <fpage>202016</fpage>
          .pdf
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pullonen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Tom,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Matulevicius</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Toots</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            :
            <surname>Privacy-Enhanced</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>BPMN</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A Multi-Level Approach to Information Disclosure Analysis, Submitted for publication (</article-title>
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Giorgini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Robol</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Salnitri</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <string-name>
            <surname>Toward</surname>
            <given-names>GDPR-Compliant</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Socio-Technical</surname>
            <given-names>Systems</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Modeling Language and Reasoning Framework</article-title>
          .
          <source>PoEM</source>
          (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6. Alakula,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M. L.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Matulevicius</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>R.:</surname>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An Experience Report of Improving Business Process Compliance Using Security Risk-Oriented Patterns</article-title>
          .
          <source>In IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>271</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>285</lpage>
          ). Springer (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Von</surname>
            <given-names>Alan</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. H.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>March</surname>
          </string-name>
          , S. T.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Park</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ram</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Design science in information systems research</article-title>
          .
          <source>MIS quarterly</source>
          ,
          <volume>28</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>75</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>105</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Brucker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A. D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Luckemeyer, G.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ruparel</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.:
          <article-title>SecureBPMN: Modeling and enforcing access control requirements in business processes</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 17th ACM symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>123</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>126</lpage>
          ). ACM (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Labda</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mehandjiev</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sampaio</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Modeling of privacy-aware business processes in BPMN to protect personal data</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>1399</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1405</lpage>
          ). ACM (
          <year>2014</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pullonen</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Matulevicius</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bogdanov</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          : PE-BPMN:
          <article-title>Privacy-Enhanced Business Process Model and Notation</article-title>
          . In International Conference on Business Process Management (pp.
          <fpage>40</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>56</lpage>
          ). Springer (
          <year>2017</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%
          <fpage>3A31995L0046</fpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Weiss</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Archick</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>US-EU data privacy: from safe harbor to privacy shield</article-title>
          . (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <article-title>Visualization of data breaches around the world</article-title>
          , http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/ worlds-biggest
          <article-title>-data-breaches-hacks/</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rodr</surname>
            <given-names>guez</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , A.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fernandez-Medina</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Piattini</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A BPMN extension for the modeling of security requirements in business processes</article-title>
          .
          <source>IEICE transactions on information and systems</source>
          ,
          <volume>90</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>745</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>752</lpage>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Delfmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Hubers, M.:
          <article-title>Towards Supporting Business Process Compliance Checking with Compliance Pattern Catalogues-A Financial Industry Case Study</article-title>
          .
          <source>Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures{International Journal of Conceptual Modeling</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>67</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>88</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Islam</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mouratidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Jurjens, J.:
          <article-title>A framework to support alignment of secure software engineering with legal regulations</article-title>
          .
          <source>Software and Systems Modeling</source>
          ,
          <volume>10</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>369</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>394</lpage>
          . (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cherdantseva</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hilton</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rana</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Towards SecureBPMN-Aligning BPMN with the information assurance and security domain</article-title>
          .
          <source>In International Workshop on Business Process Modeling Notation</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>107</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>115</lpage>
          ). Springer (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chua</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H. N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Wong</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Personal Data Protection Act Enforcement with PETs Adoption: An Exploratory Study on Employees' Working Process Change</article-title>
          .
          <source>In IT Convergence and Security</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          (pp.
          <fpage>193</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>202</lpage>
          ). Springer. (
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>DLA</given-names>
            <surname>Piper Data</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Protection</surname>
          </string-name>
          , https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Knackstedt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Braeuer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Heddier</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Becker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <source>Integrating Regulatory Requirements into Information Systems Design and Implementation</source>
          . (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Altuhhova</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Matulevicius</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ahmed</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An extension of business process model and notation for security risk management</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD)</source>
          ,
          <volume>4</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>93</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>113</lpage>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>22. DARPA Brandeis, https://www.darpa.mil/program/brandeis</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>