
Special report to Parliament: Investigation into the contracting practices of the Canada Border Services Agency related to the development of the ArriveCAN application
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) investigated the Canada Border Services Agency's (CBSA) contracting practices for the ArriveCAN application, focusing on measures to protect travellers' personal information handled by contractors. An individual's complaint and a parliamentary committee's motion prompted the review into whether contractors accessed personal information without required security clearances, potentially contravening sections 7 and 8 of the Privacy Act. The OPC found that while contracts included appropriate security clauses, there were issues with the accuracy and timeliness of security assessments (SRCLs) and overly broad task descriptions in Task Authorizations (TAs). Although vendors met organizational security requirements, one contractor worked for 18 months with an expired security clearance, exposing the CBSA to increased privacy risks. The CBSA implemented adequate administrative and technical safeguards, such as segregated environments and strict access controls, but six contractors were granted access to personal information not strictly necessary for their duties. Despite these shortcomings, the investigation found no evidence that personal information was actually used or disclosed in contravention of the Act. Consequently, the complaint was found to be not well-founded, but the OPC issued recommendations to the CBSA to strengthen its contracting and privacy practices, which the agency accepted.
- 1Whether the CBSA authorized contractors to access personal information collected through ArriveCAN without the required security clearance, in contravention of sections 7 and 8 of the Privacy Act
- 2Whether ArriveCAN contracts and Task Authorizations (TAs) contained appropriate clauses to ensure the protection of travellers’ personal information that contractors had access to
- 3Whether security requirements identified in contracts and TAs were accurate and specific
- 4Whether the CBSA complied with organizational security screening requirements for vendors
- 5Whether the CBSA complied with personnel security screening requirements for contractors
- 6Whether the CBSA implemented adequate administrative safeguards to protect personal information accessed by contractors
- 7Whether the CBSA implemented adequate technical safeguards to protect personal information accessed by contractors
- 8Whether the CBSA restricted contractor permissions and access to personal information to what was strictly necessary
- Contractual security clauses: Adequate clauses found in contracts
- Security assessments (SRCLs): Issues with accuracy and timeliness identified
- Task Authorizations (TAs): Overly broad task descriptions identified
- Contractor security clearance: One contractor worked with expired clearance
- Access to personal information: Six contractors had access not strictly necessary
- Use/disclosure of personal information: No evidence of contravention found
- Complaint outcome: Complaint not well-founded
Complaint not well-founded
The OPC found no evidence that personal information collected through ArriveCAN was actually used or disclosed in contravention of the Privacy Act, despite identifying several shortcomings in CBSA's contracting and security practices.
- s.7 Privacy Act
- s.8 Privacy Act
- s.39(1) Privacy Act
- s.40(1) Privacy Act
This summary is informational only and not legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable
Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.
Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).
Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.
Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.
Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.
Upgrade to Pro