|
Siebel Master Data Applications Reference for Industry Applications > Privacy Management Solution >
Privacy Vocabulary
The Siebel UCM Privacy Management Solution business rules are developed using English language sentences. These sentences are put together using concepts (nouns), relations between concepts, phrasing for those relations (verbs, adverbs, adjectives, prepositions and sentence fragments), and table type definitions which have been predefined in the sample knowledge base. Together these form the Conceptual Role Model. This section describes the key components of the Conceptual Role Model that you use and customize as described in Customization Methods. The sample knowledge base is named Siebel_UCM_PrivacyMgmt.akb and is located in the Tools/Rule/KnowledgeBase directory. Conceptual Role Model
The sample Conceptual Role Model included with the UCM Privacy Management Solution was developed based on input from several sources: language used in privacy policies across various industries, the privacy vocabulary research summarized the W3C's Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P) project, and terminology used by some US financial services industry customers of Siebel. The role model is intended to cover a broad set of US financial services requirements as well as a starting point for privacy policy management for other industries and geographies. You need to modify the conceptual role model to support the mapping of additional elements from UCM, to customize instances of communication message types. Key Concepts—Entities
Entities are concepts that have attributes. In UCM Privacy Management Solutions, there are two types of entities: Siebel Object Importer-generated entities that come directly from Siebel Business Component definitions; and abstract entities that are built on other entities or value concepts for convenience when using the Authority. To understand and maintain the Siebel object importer generated entities, refer to Siebel Business Rules Administration Guide for detailed instructions. The main entity objects generated by object importer include: fincorp account, fincorp account contact, ucm fincorp account contact address, ucm fincorp account contact garage address source data and history, ucm fincorp account contact privacy, and ucm fincorp account privacy. The abstract entities in the Siebel UCM Privacy Solution include:
- Abstract entity—privacy flag. This is a named collection of privacy attributes for which an option or choice is elected. The default instances of privacy preferences reflect standard elections for US financial services companies: affiliate flag, telemarketing flag, non-affiliate flag, and channel flag (for dealer sharing). Privacy preferences can also be mapped to P3P privacy statements to maintain preferences consistent with P3P privacy policies.
- Abstract entity—privacy flag source. This is a flag, election or choice that indicates whether a privacy flag is allowed, denied, or pending, and whether the privacy flag was elected by default or by request based on customer direction. Typically this entity has values of opt in default, opt in request, opt out default, opt out request, pending default and pending request.
- Abstract entity—state code. This indicates which state out of all the states that come with all the financial account contacts on the financial account is the most restrictive state for that financial account. Some states such as California, Puerto Rico and Vermont, increase the privacy regulatory requirements set by the Graham-Leach-Bliley Act or FCRA, they are listed as separate instances. The other states are listed as one generic instance. For any state code other than the fifty states or DC or Puerto Rico, this code is set to XX. This is a common practice for managing various U.S. state legislation and policy. For example, customer can have 1 state code corresponds to 1 state, or 1 state code corresponds to all states under the same federal law such as GLBA law.
Key Concepts—Values
Value concepts are created by Siebel object importer, based on Siebel object model business component field definitions. Please refer to Siebel object importer documents for detailed instructions. To simplify handling of strings in tables, by convention string instances generally have the same instance name and string value. Relations and Phrasings
Siebel object importer can create entity or value concepts, as well as establish the relations between these two and generate simple phrasings such as "an entity has a value" and so on. On top of it, Siebel UCM Privacy Solution also contains a rich library of privacy related complicated relations and phrasings. Tables
The following tables are used in the Siebel UCM Privacy Solution.
|
|
Privacy Option With Source Ranking |
|
Purpose |
This table maintains the relative priority of privacy flag sources when rolling up privacy elections to the financial account level. Note that opt out request must always be ranked number 1. This table uses the entity, privacy flag source, and a manually created integer value concept, rank. |
Module |
Privacy option and source hierarchy |
Standard phrasing to retrieve values |
a privacy flag source has a rank |
State Code Cover Letter Table and State Code Notice Type Table |
|
Purpose |
These tables stores the cover letter and privacy notice type codes based on the state code and owner type (communication message type). |
Module |
CUST.1 Owner type tables |
Standard phrasing to retrieve values |
a state code with an owner type determines a (cover letter | privacy notice sent) type |
(owner type) State Code Change Cover Letter Table |
|
Purpose |
These tables store the cover letter type codes based on the original state code and the new state code. They are instances of the same table type and the correct table is selected by the applicability condition on the parent module based on the owner type. |
Module |
CUST.2 Address changes tables |
Standard phrasing to retrieve values |
A cover letter type is determined after a second state code changes from a first state code |
State Restrictiveness Ranking Table |
|
Purpose |
This table ranks states by their restrictiveness and is used to determine which state must be the privacy state code for a financial account when there are multiple states that come with all the financial account contacts on the financial account |
Module |
US. Country rules |
Standard phrasing to retrieve values |
a state has a rank |
Default Privacy for (privacy flag) |
|
Purpose |
These tables determine the default privacy flag options for each privacy flag based on the state code. |
Module |
US.FS.1 Default privacy option tables |
Standard phrasing to retrieve values |
a state determines a (privacy flag) |
|
