PECB GDPR Practice Exams
Last updated on Oct 22,2026- Exam Code: GDPR
- Exam Name: PECB Certified Data Protection Officer
- Certification Provider: PECB
- Latest update: Oct 22,2026
Scenario 7:
EduCCS is an online education platform based in Netherlands. EduCCS helps organizations find, manage, and deliver their corporate training. Most of EduCCS’s clients are EU residents. EduCCS is one of the few education organizations that have achieved GDPR compliance since 2019. Their DPO is a full-time employee who has been engaged in most data protection processes within the organization. In addition to facilitating GDPR compliance, the DPO acts as an intermediary point between EduCCS and other relevant interested parties. EduCCS’s users can benefit from the variety of up-to-date training library and the possibility of accessing it through their phones, tablets, or computers. EduCCS’s services are offered through two main platforms: online learning and digital training. To use one of these platforms, users should sign on EduCCS’s website by providing their personal information. Online learning is a platform in which employees of other organizations can search for and request the training they need. Through its digital training platform, on the other hand, EduCCS manages the entire training and education program for other organizations. Organizations that need this type of service need to provide information about their core activities and areas where training sessions are needed. This information is then analyzed by EduCCS and a customized training program is provided. In the beginning, all IT-related services were managed by two employees of EduCCS. However, after acquiring a large number of clients, managing these services became challenging That is why EduCCS decided to outsource the IT service function to X-Tech. X-Tech provides IT support and is responsible for ensuring the security of EduCCS’s network and systems. In addition, X-Tech stores and archives EduCCS’s information including their training programs and clients’ and employees’ data. Recently, X-Tech made headlines in the technology press for being a victim of a phishing attack. A group of three attackers hacked X-Tech’s systems via a phishing campaign which targeted the employees of the Marketing Department. By compromising X-Tech’s mail server, hackers were able to gain access to more than 200 computer systems. Consequently, access to the networks of EduCCS’s clients was also allowed. Using EduCCS’s employee accounts, attackers installed a remote access tool on EduCCS’s compromised systems. By doing so, they gained access to personal information of EduCCS’s clients, training programs, and other information stored in its online payment system. The attack was detected by X-Tech’s system administrator. After detecting unusual activity in X-Tech’s network, they immediately reported it to the incident management team of the company. One week after being notified about the personal data breach, EduCCS communicated the incident to the supervisory authority with a document that outlined the reasons for the delay revealing that due to the lack of regular testing or modification, their incident response plan was not adequately prepared to handle such an attack. Based on this scenario, answer the following Question:
Question:
Based on scenario 7, due to the attack, personal data of EduCCS’ clients (such as names, email addresses, and phone numbers) were unlawfully accessed.
According to GDPR, when must EduCCS inform its clients about this personal data breach?
- A . Without undue delay.
- B . No later than 72 hours after becoming aware of it.
- C . Within 24 hours.
- D . Only if a significant financial impact is detected.
A
Explanation:
Under Article 34 of GDPR, when a breach poses a high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals,
controllers must notify affected data subjects without undue delay.
Option A is correct because data subjects must be informed without undue delay if their rights are at risk.
Option B is incorrect because the 72-hour rule applies to notifying the supervisory authority, not data subjects.
Option C is incorrect because there is no strict 24-hour requirement under GDPR.
Option D is incorrect because notification is based on the risk to individuals, not financial impact.
Reference: GDPR Article 34(1) (Obligation to notify data subjects without undue delay)
Recital 86 (Timely breach notification to affected individuals)
Question:
Based on Article 58 of GDPR, what powers must the supervisory authority have?
- A . To appoint a single DPO in a group of undertakings.
- B . To obtain access to any premises of the controller and processor, including data processing equipment.
- C . To assign the tasks of the controller or the processor and monitor their implementation.
- D . To approve all privacy policies before they are implemented.
B
Explanation:
Under Article 58 of GDPR, supervisory authorities have investigative and corrective powers, including the ability to access premises and equipment used for personal data processing.
Option B is correct because supervisory authorities can investigate controllers and processors, including accessing IT systems.
Option A is incorrect because supervisory authorities do not appoint DPOs; controllers and processors must do this themselves.
Option C is incorrect because supervisory authorities do not manage controllers’ or processors’ tasks.
Option D is incorrect because supervisory authorities do not pre-approve privacy policies.
Reference: GDPR Article 58(1)(f) (Supervisory authorities can access premises and data)
Recital 129 (Authorities must have investigation powers)
What is the main purpose of conducting a DPIA?
- A . To identify the causes of the identified risks.
- B . To extensively assess the impacts of the identified risks on individuals.
- C . To measure the potential consequences of the identified risks on the organization.
- D . To eliminate all risks associated with processing personal data.
B
Explanation:
Under Article 35 of GDPR, a DPIA’s primary goal is to assess the risks to individuals’ rights and
freedoms arising from data processing.
Option B is correct because DPIAs focus on evaluating and mitigating risks to data subjects.
Option A is incorrect because DPIAs are not just about identifying causes but about assessing and mitigating risks.
Option C is incorrect because GDPR prioritizes risks to individuals, not just organizations.
Option D is incorrect because eliminating all risks is not possible―DPIAs aim to manage and minimize risks.
Reference: GDPR Article 35(1) (DPIA requirement for high-risk processing)
Recital 84 (DPIAs help protect individuals’ rights)
Scenario 9:
Soin is a French travel agency with the largest network of professional travel agents throughout Europe. They aim to create unique vacations for clients regardless of the destinations they seek. The company specializes in helping people find plane tickets, reservations at hotels, cruises, and other activities.
As any other industry, travel is no exception when it comes to GDPR compliance. Soin was directly affected by the enforcement of GDPR since its main activities require the collection and processing of customers’ data. Data collected by Soin includes customer’s ID or passport details, financial and payment information, and contact information. This type of data is defined as personal by the GDPR; hence, Soin’s data processing activities are built based on customer’s consent.
At the beginning, as for many other companies, GDPR compliance was a complicated issue for Soin. However, the process was completed within a few months and later on the company appointed a DPO. Last year, the supervisory authority of France, requested the conduct of a data protection external audit in Soin without an early notice. To ensure GDPR compliance before an external audit was conducted, Soin organized an internal audit. The data protection internal audit was conducted by the DPO of the company. The audit was initiated by firstly confirming the accuracy of records related to all current Soin’s data processing activities. The DPO considered that verifying compliance to Article 30 of GDPR would help in defining the data protection internal audit scope. The DPO noticed that not all processing activities of Soin were documented as required by the GDPR. For example, processing activities records of the company did not include a description of transfers of personal data to third countries. In addition, there was no clear description of categories of personal data processed by the company. Other areas that were audited included content of data protection policy, data retention guidelines, how sensitive data is stored, and security policies and practices. The DPO conducted interviews with some employees at different levels of the company. During the audit, the DPO came across some emails sent by Soin’s clients claiming that they do not have access in their personal data stored by Soin. Soin’s Customer Service Department answered the emails saying that, based on Soin’s policies, a client cannot have access to personal data stored by the company. Based on the information gathered, the DPO concluded that there was a lack of employee awareness on the GDPR.
All these findings were documented in the audit report. Once the audit was completed, the DPO drafted action plans to resolve the nonconformities found. Firstly, the DPO created a new procedure which could ensure the right of access to clients. All employees were provided with GDPR compliance awareness sessions. Moreover, the DPO established a document which described the transfer of personal data to third countries and the applicability of safeguards when this transfer is done to an international organization.
Based on this scenario, answer the following Question:
According to scenario 9, the DPO drafted and implemented all action plans to resolve the nonconformities found. Is this acceptable?
- A . No, the DPO should only evaluate and follow up on action plans submitted in response to
nonconformities - B . No, the DPO should implement action plans as arranged in order of priority by top management
- C . Yes, the DPO is responsible for drafting, implementing, and reviewing corrections and corrective actions
A
Explanation:
According to GDPR Article 39(1), the DPO’s role is to monitor compliance, provide advice, and act as a point of contact for supervisory authorities. However, the DPO should not directly implement action plans, as this could create a conflict of interest (Recital 97). The responsibility for implementation lies with the controller or relevant departments, while the DPO ensures that the corrective actions align with GDPR requirements.
Scenario 1:
MED is a healthcare provider located in Norway. It provides high-quality and affordable healthcare services, including disease prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. Founded in 1995, MED is one of the largest health organizations in the private sector. The company has constantly evolved in response to patients’ needs.
Patients that schedule an appointment in MED’s medical centers initially need to provide their personal information, including name, surname, address, phone number, and date of birth. Further checkups or admission require additional information, including previous medical history and genetic data. When providing their personal data, patients are informed that the data is used for personalizing treatments and improving communication with MED’s doctors. Medical data of patients, including children, are stored in the database of MED’s health information system. MED allows patients who are at least 16 years old to use the system and provide their personal information independently. For children below the age of 16, MED requires consent from the holder of parental responsibility before processing their data.
MED uses a cloud-based application that allows patients and doctors to upload and access information. Patients can save all personal medical data, including test results, doctor visits, diagnosis history, and medicine prescriptions, as well as review and track them at any time. Doctors, on the other hand, can access their patients’ data through the application and can add information as needed.
Patients who decide to continue their treatment at another health institution can request MED to transfer their data. However, even if patients decide to continue their treatment elsewhere, their personal data is still used by MED. Patients’ requests to stop data processing are rejected. This decision was made by MED’s top management to retain the information of everyone registered in their databases.
The company also shares medical data with InsHealth, a health insurance company. MED’s data helps InsHealth create health insurance plans that meet the needs of individuals and families.
MED believes that it is its responsibility to ensure the security and accuracy of patients’ personal data. Based on the identified risks associated with data processing activities, MED has implemented appropriate security measures to ensure that data is securely stored and processed.
Since personal data of patients is stored and transmitted over the internet, MED uses encryption to avoid unauthorized processing, accidental loss, or destruction of data. The company has established a security policy to define the levels of protection required for each type of information and processing activity. MED has communicated the policy and other procedures to personnel and provided customized training to ensure proper handling of data processing.
Question:
Based on scenario 1, MED shares patients’ personal data with a health insurance company.
Does MED comply with the purpose limitation principle?
- A . Yes, personal data may be used for purposes in the public interest or statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89 of GDPR.
- B . Yes, using personal data for creating health insurance plans is within the scope of the data collection purpose.
- C . No, personal data should be collected for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes in accordance with Article 5 of GDPR.
- D . Yes, as long as the data is encrypted before sharing.
C
Explanation:
Under Article 5(1)(b) of GDPR, personal data must be collected for specific, explicit, and legitimate purposes and cannot be further processed in a manner incompatible with those purposes. Sharing medical data with an insurance company is a separate purpose and requires explicit consent or another lawful basis.
Reference: GDPR Article 5(1)(b) (Purpose limitation)
Question:
A patient gave consent for the use of their laboratory tests to defend a clinical laboratory against a lawsuit. As a result, the court required the collection and processing of the patient’s health data, and such information was revealed in court.
Is this compliant with GDPR’s lawfulness of processing requirements?
- A . Yes, because the data subject has consented to the processing of health data, and GDPR allows the processing of special categories of data where it is necessary for the establishment, exercise, or defense of legal claims.
- B . Yes, but only if the processing of special categories of personal data is controlled by a public health institution, and the data subject has consented to the processing of this type of data.
- C . No, although the data subject has consented to the processing of health data, GDPR does not allow the disclosure of special categories of personal data by health institutions.
- D . No, because personal data used in legal proceedings must be anonymized before being disclosed.
A
Explanation:
Under Article 9(2)(f) of GDPR, the processing of special categories of data (e.g., health data) is permitted without consent if it is necessary for the establishment, exercise, or defense of legal claims.
Option A is correct because GDPR allows processing of special category data for legal claims, even without explicit consent.
Option B is incorrect because processing for legal claims is not restricted to public health institutions.
Option C is incorrect because GDPR explicitly allows such processing for legal claims.
Option D is incorrect because anonymization is not required when data is processed under Article 9(2)(f).
Reference: GDPR Article 9(2)(f) (Processing of special categories of data for legal claims)
Recital 52 (Legal grounds for processing sensitive data in court cases)
Which statement below regarding the difference between anonymization and pseudonymization is correct?
- A . Anonymization is reversible and the original data can be retrieved with the use of a public key encryption, while pseudonymization is not reversible and can be used only for non-identifiable data, such as gender, nationality, and occupation
- B . Anonymization is not reversible and the original data cannot be attributed to an individual, while pseudonymization is reversible and the original data can be attributed to an individual with the use of additional information
- C . Anonymization is the process of replacing a portion of the data with a common value to keep the identity of individuals anonymous, whereas pseudonymization is the process of adding mathematical noise to the data
B
Explanation:
According to GDPR Recital 26, anonymization permanently removes any possibility of re-identification, making it irreversible. Pseudonymization, as defined in Article 4(5), is reversible if the correct key or additional information is available. Pseudonymization still qualifies as personal data under GDPR, whereas anonymized data falls outside the scope of GDPR.
Which of the statements below related to compliance monitoring is correct?
- A . The DPO should monitor and measure all activities of the organization in order to ensure the suitability and effectiveness of the GDPR compliance program
- B . The DPO should monitor internal compliance of the organization with applicable data protection laws
- C . The DPO should assign roles and responsibilities to monitor GDPR compliance
B
Explanation:
GDPR Article 39(1)(b) states that the DPO is responsible for monitoring internal compliance with data protection laws, rather than assigning responsibilities or measuring all activities.
Scenario 7:
Scenario 7: EduCCS is an online education platform based in Netherlands. EduCCS helps organizations find, manage, and deliver their corporate training. Most of EduCCS’s clients are EU residents. EduCCS is one of the few education organizations that have achieved GDPR compliance since 2019. Their DPO is a full-time employee who has been engaged in most data protection processes within the organization. In addition to facilitating GDPR compliance, the DPO acts as an intermediary point between EduCCS and other relevant interested parties. EduCCS’s users can benefit from the variety of up-to-date training library and the possibility of accessing it through their phones, tablets, or computers. EduCCS’s services are offered through two main platforms: online learning and digital training. To use one of these platforms, users should sign on EduCCS’s website by providing their personal information. Online learning is a platform in which employees of other organizations can search for and request the training they need. Through its digital training platform, on the other hand, EduCCS manages the entire training and education program for other organizations. Organizations that need this type of service need to provide information about their core activities and areas where training sessions are needed. This information is then analyzed by EduCCS and a customized training program is provided. In the beginning, all IT-related services were managed by two employees of EduCCS. However, after acquiring a large number of clients, managing these services became challenging That is why EduCCS decided to outsource the IT service function to X-Tech. X-Tech provides IT support and is responsible for ensuring the security of EduCCS’s network and systems. In addition, X-Tech stores and archives EduCCS’s information including their training programs and clients’ and employees’ data. Recently, X-Tech made headlines in the technology press for being a victim of a phishing attack. A group of three attackers hacked X-Tech’s systems via a phishing campaign which targeted the employees of the Marketing Department. By compromising X-Tech’s mail server, hackers were able to gain access to more than 200 computer systems. Consequently, access to the networks of EduCCS’s clients was also allowed. Using EduCCS’s employee accounts, attackers installed a remote access tool on EduCCS’s compromised systems. By doing so, they gained access to personal information of EduCCS’s clients, training programs, and other information stored in its online payment system. The attack was detected by X-Tech’s system administrator. After detecting unusual activity in X-Tech’s network, they immediately reported it to the incident management team of the company. One week after being notified about the personal data breach, EduCCS communicated the incident to the supervisory authority with a document that outlined the reasons for the delay revealing that due to the lack of regular testing or modification, their incident response plan was not adequately prepared to handle such an attack. Based on this scenario, answer the following Question:
Question:
Which of the following statements best reflects a lesson learned from the scenario?
- A . The incident response plan should prioritize immediate communication with the supervisory authority to ensure timely and compliant handling of data breaches.
- B . EduCCS should keep its IT services in-house, as outsourcing to X-Tech was the primary cause of the data breach.
- C . Regular testing and modification of incident response plans are essential for ensuring prompt detection and effective response to data breaches.
- D . EduCCS is not responsible for the data breach since it occurred at X-Tech, a third-party provider.
C
Explanation:
Under Article 32 and Article 33 of GDPR, organizations must implement security measures and
ensure incident response plans are regularly tested and updated. EduCCS’ failure to prepare its response plan delayed notification, violating GDPR’s 72-hour breach notification requirement.
Option C is correct because regular testing of incident response plans helps prevent delays in breach notifications.
Option A is incorrect because while timely communication is important, the root issue was the lack of preparedness.
Option B is incorrect because outsourcing is allowed under GDPR if the controller ensures compliance through a Data Processing Agreement (DPA) (Article 28).
Option D is incorrect because EduCCS remains responsible for data protection, even when outsourcing to a processor.
Reference: GDPR Article 32(1)(d) (Regular testing of security measures)
GDPR Article 33(1) (72-hour breach notification requirement)
Scenario 5:
Recpond is a German employment recruiting company. Their services are delivered globally and include consulting and staffing solutions. In the beginning. Recpond provided its services through an office in Germany. Today, they have grown to become one of the largest recruiting agencies, providing employment to more than 500,000 people around the world. Recpond receives most applications through its website. Job searchers are required to provide the job title and location. Then, a list of job opportunities is provided. When a job position is selected, candidates are required to provide their contact details and professional work experience records. During the process, they are informed that the information will be used only for the purposes and period determined by Recpond. Recpond’s experts analyze candidates’ profiles and applications and choose the candidates that are suitable for the job position. The list of the selected candidates is then delivered to Recpond’s clients, who proceed with the recruitment process. Files of candidates that are not selected are stored in Recpond’s databases, including the personal data of candidates who withdraw the consent on which the processing was based. When the GDPR came into force, the company was unprepared. The top management appointed a DPO and consulted him for all data protection issues. The DPO, on the other hand, reported the progress of all data protection activities to the top management. Considering the level of sensitivity of the personal data processed by Recpond, the DPO did not have direct access to the personal data of all clients, unless the top management deemed it necessary. The DPO planned the GDPR implementation by initially analyzing the applicable GDPR requirements. Recpond, on the other hand, initiated a risk assessment to understand the risks associated with processing operations. The risk assessment was conducted based on common risks that employment recruiting companies face. After analyzing different risk scenarios, the level of risk was determined and evaluated. The results were presented to the DPO, who then decided to analyze only the risks that have a greater impact on the company. The DPO concluded that the cost required for treating most of the identified risks was higher than simply accepting them. Based on this analysis, the DPO decided to accept the actual level of the identified risks. After reviewing policies and procedures of the company. Recpond established a new data protection policy. As proposed by the DPO, the information security policy was also updated. These changes were then communicated to all employees of Recpond. Based on this scenario, answer the following Question:
Question:
Which statement regarding the material scope of the GDPR is incorrect?
- A . The GDPR applies to the processing of personal data wholly or partly by automated means.
- B . The GDPR applies to the processing of personal data in the course of an activity that falls outside the scope of Union law.
- C . The GDPR does not apply to the processing of personal data by Member States when carrying out activities that fall within the scope of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
- D . The GDPR applies to the processing of personal data by a company established in the EEA, even if the data subjects are located outside the EEA.
B
Explanation:
The material scope of the GDPR is outlined in Article 2. It applies to the processing of personal data by automated means and to non-automated processing if the data is part of a filing system. The GDPR does not apply to activities outside the scope of Union law, such as national security activities, which are excluded under Recital 16.
Option B is correct because the GDPR does not apply to activities falling outside the scope of Union law, such as law enforcement operations covered by the Law Enforcement Directive (EU 2016/680).
Option A is incorrect because automated processing is explicitly covered by GDPR.
Option C is incorrect because data processing by Member States under TEU (e.g., national security and defense) is excluded.
Option D is incorrect because GDPR applies to controllers/processors established in the EEA, even if data subjects are outside the EEA (Article 3(1)).
Reference: GDPR Article 2(2)(a) (Exclusion of activities outside EU law)
GDPR Article 3(1) (Territorial scope)
Recital 16 (GDPR does not apply to national security)