EvidenceSheet

P2.1 Choice and consent

Data subjects are told what choices they have over how personal information is collected, used, kept, shared and disposed of and the consequences of each; explicit consent is obtained where required and only for the intended purpose; and the basis for relying on implicit consent is documented. Points of focus: data subjects learn their choices and that consent is needed unless law provides otherwise; they learn the consequences of refusing or withdrawing consent; consent, implied or express, is obtained at or before collection or soon after and their preferences are honoured; new purposes are documented, notified and consented before use; explicit consent is obtained directly for sensitive information unless law says otherwise; and consent is obtained before information moves onto or off a person's device.

Source: SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria), P2.1. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria) in the compliance library.

These are criteria, not controls: you design controls that meet them, and which criteria are in scope follows the categories your report covers (Security always; Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity and Privacy only if chosen). A Type 2 report tests that the controls operated across the period, so the evidence asked for is samples across that period, not one copy.

4
artefacts
1
held by a system
2
at each review
moderate
to go live
SIEM / log platform
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

  • Cookie consent configuration and logs · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Consent capture records and preference management system · Data governance / DLP tooling
  • Records of consent obtained for new purposes · Data governance / DLP tooling

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Documented basis for implicit consent · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (SIEM / log platform); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

P1.1 Privacy notice to data subjects · P3.1 Collecting personal information consistent with objectives