Your cookie preferences

EDPB guidance · Art. 7 GDPR

We use technical cookies essential for the platform to work (login, security, sessions). We would also like to use analytics cookies to understand how to improve it.

You can accept all, reject all, or choose which categories to switch on.Your consent is valid for 6 months and you can withdraw it at any time from the footer.

You will find everything in our privacy notice.

All news
Enforcement July 1, 2026 4 min

SPID under scrutiny: Lepida fined, data of 1.5 million citizens viewable 'out of mere curiosity'

Over 7,000 counter operators could download ID documents and health cards with no operational need. The lesson: access governance is privacy by design

TL;DR for the DPO

The Italian DPA fined Lepida (EUR 100,000, decision of 29 April 2026): in the LepidaID service over 7,000 operators could access, in a substantially indiscriminate way, data and documents of 1.5 million citizens. The DPA found an overly permissive access model, lack of privacy by design/by default (Art. 25), copies of ID documents kept on operators' workstations after identification, and a joint-controllership arrangement not matching the real allocation of responsibilities.

The three points that matter

  • Need to know, not 'everyone sees everything': being an authorised operator does not justify access to any record. You need differentiated profiles, access tied to the case being handled, and alerts on anomalous access.
  • Privacy by design (Art. 25) is engineering, not paperwork: if the system STRUCTURALLY allows indiscriminate access, the breach exists even without abuse. 'Curiosity' accesses are the symptom, not the cause.
  • Leftover files are a forgotten risk: document copies remaining on workstations after the case = storage without necessity. Automatic deletion at the end of the process is needed.

What to do now, in practice

For every client whose operators access third-party data (counters, tax-assistance centres, agencies, healthcare, public sector): 1) map WHO can see WHAT and check that access is tied to operational need; 2) ask the software vendor for differentiated profiles and access logs with alerts; 3) check that uploaded/scanned documents do not remain on local PCs after the case. The 'moderate' fine (100k) reflects the mitigating factors - cooperation and immediate fixes - not the seriousness of the design flaw.

Why it matters for your clients

The case matters because Lepida is no improvised player: it is the Emilia-Romagna in-house company that trains public bodies on digital services. If it happens there, it can happen wherever a system has too many eyes inside. For a DPO it is the perfect argument to bring access governance to the client's table: appointing authorised staff is not enough - the system must make unnecessary access impossible.

Official source:Italian Data Protection Authority - decision of 29 April 2026 (Lepida S.c.p.A.)

Looking for a workspace for your DPO work?

DPO Workspace is built by a certified DPO. 30-day free trial.

Start free

Related articles

Enforcement
€16,7Mfor telemarketing and contracts activated without consent

Italian DPA fines Wind Tre €16.7 million: telemarketing despite objections and contracts activated without customers' knowledge

People who had objected kept receiving calls, and some contracts were activated without the person knowing. The Garante fines Wind Tre €16.7 million and restates a principle for every company with an agency network: responsibility is not outsourced along with sales.

Oct 12, 2026New 5 min
Enforcement
€350kto controller and processor over outdated systems

Greece: €350,000 for a data breach — both the Ministry and the processor running outdated systems fined, and there was no Article 28 contract

An attack on the systems of the agency running a Ministry's programmes exposed identification, financial and health data of a very large number of people. The Hellenic DPA fines the controller €200,000 and the processor €150,000: notifying well is not enough if the supplier works on outdated systems and the relationship is not governed by a contract.

Oct 08, 2026New 5 min
Enforcement
€4kfor a camera pointed at a home

Italian DPA fines the municipality of Arvier €4,000: a camera filmed a resident's windows and balconies, and the masking came too late

A small municipality in the Aosta Valley uses cameras for traffic, parking, number plates, the environment and civil protection. A resident finds that one covers her home. The Garante imposes a fine and makes a point that applies to every system: masking private areas is designed before the camera is switched on, not after the complaint.

Oct 08, 2026New 5 min