A DPO is a legal requirement, not a nice-to-have — and citizen data breaches make the news for years.
Public authorities are automatically within scope for a mandatory DPO under GDPR Article 37, hold some of the most sensitive citizen data in the economy, and are explicitly targeted by the UK's Cyber Security and Resilience Bill and the EU's NIS2 Directive as critical infrastructure. Public-sector breaches carry a reputational cost that compounds long after the incident itself.
Five questions public sector & government teams rarely have a clean answer to
If any of these make you pause, that pause is the gap Praeferre exists to close.
“Is your DPO genuinely independent, or reporting to the same director who owns the systems they oversee?”
See how — DPO as a Service“Could you evidence CAF 4.0 alignment today if your regulator asked, or would it take weeks to compile?”
See how — GRC Automation“Do your outsourced IT and case management suppliers meet the same bar you're held to?”
See how — Third-Party Risk Management“Are staff pasting case notes into AI tools to draft correspondence faster?”
See how — AI Data Leak Protection“When was your citizen-facing portal last tested by someone trying to break into it, not just scan it?”
See how — Penetration TestingQuestions we get asked
The ones this page is built around are GDPR, NIS2, UK Cyber Security & Resilience Bill and CAF 4.0. Praeferre monitors all of them from a single engine, alongside anything else on the frameworks list and your own internal policies, so you are not running a separate programme per regulation.
Usually not in intent but in evidence. The questions above are the ones that tend to cause a pause — for example: “Is your DPO genuinely independent, or reporting to the same director who owns the systems they oversee?” Closing that kind of gap, and being able to show it is closed, is what the platform is for.
Most often DPO as a Service, GRC Automation, Third-Party Risk Management, AI Data Leak Protection and Penetration Testing — the modules the questions above map to. They share one data model and one dashboard, so evidence gathered for one framework counts towards the others.
Yes. Custom and internal frameworks are modelled in the same engine as the statutory ones, so an internal standard, a contractual commitment to a customer or a sector code of practice is monitored and evidenced the same way.
See what Praeferre would surface in your environment
A short discovery call is enough to map which of these questions are already answered — and which aren't.