Ccpa Cpra Privacy Rights

CCPA / CPRA Privacy Rights

Overview

This skill operationalizes California privacy law under CCPA as amended by CPRA (operationalized by the California Privacy Protection Agency, CPPA). Key statutes:

Personal information (PI) includes identifiers, commercial information, biometric data, geolocation, and inferences—prompts and agent logs may contain PI even when not HIPAA PHI.

Sensitive personal information (SPI) includes SSN, precise geolocation, racial/ethnic origin, mail/email/password in combination with credentials, and contents of mail/email (with exceptions).

AI/agent systems must address: what PI enters LLM prompts, retention by LLM vendors, subprocessor chains, and DSAR fulfillment across agent databases and logs.

When to Use

Use this skill when:

• Processing California residents' PI in products, analytics, or agent workflows
• Building or auditing Data Subject Access Request (DSAR) / consumer rights request programs
• Reviewing privacy policies, notice at collection, and CPRA addendum disclosures
• Assessing sale/share of PI (including cross-context behavioral advertising) and opt-out mechanisms
• Drafting or reviewing service provider agreements for LLM, MCP, or analytics vendors
• Evaluating agent prompt/logging practices for PI minimization and deletion capability
• Responding to CPPA enforcement trends or customer CPRA questionnaires

Do not use this skill when:

• HIPAA Security Rule technical controls only (use hipaa-technical-safeguards)
• PCI PAN encryption and key management (use pci-dss-encryption-key-management)
• SOC 2 TSC-only audits without California PI (use soc2-trust-services-criteria)
• Breach notification under HIPAA/state breach laws without CPRA rights scope (use breach-incident-response)

Core Process

Execute steps in order.

Step 1: Scope and role determination

1. Determine if organization is business, service provider, contractor, or third party per §1798.140 definitions.
2. Map data flows for California consumers:
   • Web/app collection → agent prompts → LLM API → logs → MCP Postgres evidence store
3. Identify business purposes vs commercial purposes (sale/share) per §1798.140.
4. Document sensitive PI categories collected—triggers §1798.121 Limit the Use rights.
5. Artifact: cpra-data-map-{id}.json.

Step 2: Consumer rights inventory

For each right, document statutory basis, process owner, SLA, and systems affected:

Step 3: DSAR intake and verification

1. Provide two or more designated methods for submission (§1798.130(a)(1))—web form, toll-free, email.
2. Verify consumer identity to reasonable degree (§1798.140)—do not over-collect verification PI.
3. For agent-related requests:
   • Query internal stores: session logs, redaction.py token maps (may contain PI—handle as SPI)
   • Issue vendor requests to LLM provider if they hold PI on your behalf (requires contract terms)
4. Log DSAR in tracker: request ID, type, receipt date, verification status, due date, outcome.
5. Do not send raw consumer PI to LLM for DSAR processing—use redaction or structured DB queries via Postgres MCP (read-only, audited).

Step 4: DSAR fulfillment workflow

1. Access (Know):
   • Categories and specific pieces of PI collected (§1798.110)
   • Sources, business/commercial purposes, third parties disclosed to (§1798.115)
   • Deliver in portable format; exclude other consumers' data and trade secrets
2. Delete:
   • Direct service providers/contractors to delete (§1798.105(c))
   • Delete agent session data, cached prompts, analytics events
   • Document exceptions: legal retention, security incidents, complete transaction
3. Correct:
   • Correct inaccurate PI; instruct service providers per §1798.106
4. Opt-out / Limit:
   • Honor Global Privacy Control (GPC) as valid opt-out signal where required (CPPA regulations)
   • Implement Limit SPI link if collecting SPI for non-essential purposes (§1798.135(a)(2))

Step 5: Privacy notices and disclosures

1. Review privacy policy for CPRA-required elements (§1798.130(a)(5)):
   • Categories of PI collected, purposes, retention, sale/share practices
   • Consumer rights and how to exercise them
   • SPI categories and Limit the Use link if applicable
   • Automated decision-making disclosure if applicable (§1798.185)
2. Notice at collection at each collection point—including agent chat interfaces.
3. Annual privacy metrics (if business meets volume thresholds)—requests received and median response times.
4. Artifact: privacy-notice-gap-analysis-{id}.md.

Step 6: Service provider and LLM vendor contracts

1. Verify written contracts prohibit selling/sharing PI and restrict use to business purposes (§1798.140(ag)).
2. For LLM/agent vendors, contract must address:
   • No training on consumer PI unless disclosed and permitted
   • Deletion support for DSAR
   • Subprocessor notification
   • Security requirements comparable to CPRA §1798.100(e)
3. Cross-ref vendor-third-party-risk for assessment methodology and hipaa-baa-vendor-assessment only if PHI overlap exists.
4. Distinguish service provider vs third party—third party relationships require consumer notice and opt-out where applicable.

Step 7: Agent and MCP data handling controls

1. Minimization: Do not pass consumer PI to LLM beyond task necessity—align with hipaa-phi-redaction-pipeline patterns for tokenization.
2. Retention: Define TTL for agent logs; automated deletion jobs.
3. Sale/share analysis: Review whether analytics, advertising integrations, or data licensing constitute sale or sharing under CPRA definitions.
4. MCP logging: Ensure Slack/Postgres MCP does not persist consumer PI in cleartext—see mcp-compliance-integration.
5. GPC/opt-out: Technical honor signal before agent enriches profile with shared data.

Step 8: Findings and remediation

1. Emit findings with CPRA citations:

id: FIND-CPRA-001
severity: HIGH
control_id: CCPA-1798.105
observation: "Agent session store lacks delete workflow for DSAR"
recommendation: "Implement deletion API covering Postgres evidence DB and 30-day LLM vendor purge SLA"
owner: ""
due_date: null
status: open

2. Package evidence: data map, notice copies, DSAR samples (redacted), contract clauses, policy versions with hashes.

Common Rationalizations

Red Flags

• Consumer PI sent to LLM without service provider agreement restricting secondary use
• No mechanism to delete agent session history per verified DSAR
• Privacy policy missing SPI categories or Limit the Use link when SPI collected
• Analytics/ad SDKs active after consumer opt-out of sale/share
• Postgres MCP evidence database retains consumer PI indefinitely without retention policy
• DSAR responses include other consumers' PI (over-disclosure)
• Verification process collects more PI than necessary (SSN required for all requests)
• GPC signal ignored on website where regulations apply

Verification

• Data map complete for California consumer PI including agent/LLM flows
• Business vs service provider vs third party roles documented per vendor
• All six consumer rights have documented processes, owners, and SLAs
• DSAR intake, verification, and fulfillment tested with sample request (synthetic data)
• Privacy policy and notice at collection reviewed against §1798.130/§1798.135
• LLM and MCP vendor contracts include CPRA service provider provisions
• Sale/share analysis complete with opt-out and GPC technical controls verified
• SPI Limit the Use mechanism implemented where required
• Agent log retention and deletion automation documented and tested
• Evidence package hashed with engagement ID and audit timestamp