CCPA/CPRA
General duties: notice at collection, purpose limitation and security – CCPA/CPRA

CCPA/CPRA 1798.100(a): Inform consumers at or before collection

Before or when it collects personal information, a business that controls that collection must tell consumers which categories it will collect, including any sensitive categories, why each is collected or used, whether each is sold or shared, and how long each category will be kept (or the criteria that set the period). It may not later gather new categories, or put existing data to purposes incompatible with those it announced, without first giving a fresh notice. A third party that controls collection may meet this by a prominent notice on its website homepage, and must give the notice at the location when it collects on premises (1798.100(b)).

Maintained by Gerard BlokdykVerified against the published standard Control text last updated

What else in your programme already covers this

This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.

GDPR · 1 control

  • GDPR-Art.13 Information to be provided where personal data are collected

ISO/IEC 27701:2025 · 1 control

  • A.1.3.4 Providing information to PII principals

Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.

Other controls in General duties: notice at collection, purpose limitation and security – CCPA/CPRA

You are reading one control. How much of CCPA/CPRA have you already done?

CCPA/CPRA 1798.100(a) is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of CCPA/CPRA your existing evidence covers. Hold GDPR and 17 of 89 CCPA/CPRA controls already carry evidence.

Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 0 were rejected on the GDPR pair alone.

Query this from an agent

The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.