Under GDPR art. 9(2)(g), biometric data for uniquely identifying a person may be processed only where necessary for authentication or for security purposes, and (since the Verzamelwet gegevensbescherming, in force 1 September 2026) only insofar as necessary because of a weighty public interest in lawful access to particular places, buildings, services, products, information systems or work process systems. Convenience, cost saving and time registration are not such an access need (the AP has fined an employer for fingerprint-based time registration); outside this exception, explicit consent under art. 22(2)(a), rarely freely given by employees, is the only route. The Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens' DPIA list (Staatscourant 2019, 64418) requires a DPIA for large-scale or systematic biometric processing.
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.