The first-layer sign should convey the key information: the purposes, the controller's identity and the existence of data subject rights, with the processing's greatest impacts, such as the legitimate interest pursued and the data protection officer's contact details where applicable, and must point to the second layer and where to find it. It should also state anything that could surprise people, such as transfers to third parties (especially to non-EU countries) and how long footage is kept; absent that, people may assume live monitoring only, with no recording or transmission.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
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.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.