Security overview for recruiting data

Ben Argeband, Founder & CEO of Heartbeat.ai — No compliance cosplay. We’ll tell you what’s in-product, what’s process, and what’s available on request so procurement can file it and move on.

Who this is for

This is for Procurement + IT reviewers evaluating Heartbeat.ai (or any recruiting data vendor) and needing a procurement-ready overview: access control, encryption scope, audit logs, incident response, subprocessors, retention/deletion, and transparency workflows.

Quick Answer

Core Answer

Validate access control, encryption scope, audit logs, incident response, subprocessor transparency, and retention/deletion for recruiting data—then require a corrections workflow and change log to keep trust current.

Key Insight

In recruiting tools, exports and permission changes are the highest-risk moments; if those aren’t permissioned and logged, governance is mostly paperwork.

Best For

Procurement + IT reviewers running vendor risk review for recruiting workflows.

Compliance & Safety

This method is for legitimate recruiting outreach only. Always respect candidate privacy, opt-out requests, and local data laws. Heartbeat does not provide medical advice or legal counsel.

Framework: Procurement checklist tone (no hype)

Procurement reviews stall when a vendor blurs what’s implemented versus what’s recommended. Use this structure to keep answers auditable. Control availability can vary by configuration; request the evidence pack for your review.

Scope & boundaries (what this page is and isn’t)

• This page covers: security controls and review artifacts relevant to recruiting data workflows.
• This page does not replace: your organization’s vendor risk questionnaire, legal review, or a signed security addendum.
• Shared responsibility: your internal policies (user offboarding, export policy, acceptable use) matter as much as vendor controls.

Controls summary (Heartbeat.ai)

• Access control: role-based access patterns and least-privilege intent for user permissions.
• Audit logs: audit logging for key user and administrative actions (including exports and permission changes) to support investigations and internal review.
• Incident response: a defined process for triage, containment, communication, and remediation (high-level).

Recommended controls (buyer checklist)

• Encryption scope: confirm encryption in transit and at rest for your specific data flows; request scope and evidence.
• Export governance: restrict exports by role, log exports, and review export activity on a defined cadence.
• Subprocessor transparency: maintain a current list of subprocessors and what they do.
• Retention & deletion: define retention windows and deletion expectations for recruiting data and audit logs.
• Corrections workflow: a clear “report an issue” intake and a visible change log pattern (date, what changed, why).

If you need artifacts for your file (role matrix, encryption scope summary, audit log field list, incident response overview, subprocessor list, retention/deletion summary), they’re available on request.

Step-by-step method

1) Define your recruiting data scope (so controls map to reality)

Before you send a questionnaire, write down what you consider “recruiting data” in your environment. Typical categories:

• Candidate identifiers (name, email, phone)
• Professional details (specialty, employer, location)
• Outreach metadata (timestamps, message content, opt-out status)
• User activity (logins, exports, admin actions)

This prevents a common failure mode: the vendor answers a generic question, but your risk team needed a specific control for a specific data type.

2) Validate access control against your org chart, not the vendor’s UI

For recruiting tools, access control is where risk and workflow collide. Ask for a role model that matches how your team actually operates (sourcing, outreach, ops, leadership) and confirm least privilege.

• Least privilege: users only access what they need for their role.
• Admin boundaries: admin actions are distinct and reviewable.
• Account lifecycle: provisioning and deprovisioning expectations (especially with agency turnover).

The trade-off is… tighter permissions can slow teams if roles are too rigid. The practical fix is a small set of roles that map to real recruiting tasks, plus a documented escalation path for temporary access.

3) Confirm encryption scope (don’t assume; verify)

Procurement language matters here. Don’t ask “do you encrypt?” Ask:

• Which data is encrypted in transit?
• Which data is encrypted at rest?
• Are there exceptions (and why)?
• What evidence can you provide for our review?

This requires manual verification. If your policy requires specific key management or retention details, include those requirements explicitly so the vendor can respond precisely.

4) Treat exports and permission changes as the highest-risk events

In recruiting systems, “data incident” often looks like an over-broad export or a permission change that went unnoticed. Require auditability for:

• Exports (who exported, what scope, when)
• Permission changes (who granted access, to whom, when)
• Admin actions (what changed, by whom, when)
• Authentication events (logins, failed attempts)

Ask whether these events are logged, how long logs are retained, and how you can obtain them during an investigation.

5) Review incident response at the “high-level but real” layer

You don’t need a long playbook to evaluate readiness. You need to know the basics are defined and owned:

• Detection & triage: how issues are identified and prioritized.
• Containment: how access is restricted and blast radius reduced.
• Communication: how customers are notified and what information is shared.
• Remediation: how root cause is addressed and recurrence prevented.

Procurement tip: confirm escalation contacts and the notification expectations your organization requires.

6) Ask for subprocessor transparency (common procurement blocker)

If your organization requires it, request a current list of subprocessors, what each subprocessor does, and how changes are communicated. If this isn’t public, request it in writing; it should be available on request.

7) Confirm retention & deletion expectations (so you can answer your own questionnaire)

Retention is where “security” meets policy. Ask for a retention/deletion summary that covers:

• Recruiting data retention expectations
• Audit log retention expectations
• Deletion process and what “deletion” means in practice (removal from active systems, and how backups are handled)

If you need this for your vendor risk file, it’s available on request.

8) Tie controls to recruiting outcomes (so teams don’t route around them)

Security controls that break recruiting speed create shadow workflows. The goal is governance that still supports day-to-day recruiting execution. For phone outreach workflows, Heartbeat.ai can support features like ranked mobile numbers by answer probability; that makes it even more important to restrict who can view and export contact data and to keep export activity auditable.

Diagnostic Table:

Use this table to run a fast internal review before you send a vendor questionnaire. It’s designed for procurement files: clear asks, clear evidence, and a place to mark what’s in-product vs process vs requested.

Required visual note: Maintain a simple change log table (public page or customer-facing doc) with columns: Date, What changed, Why it changed. Add a persistent “report an issue” CTA that routes to a tracked intake.

Weighted Checklist:

This scoring sheet helps you compare vendors quickly without turning the review into a long project. Adjust weights to match your policy.

Scoring guidance: If access control or audit logs fail, pause rollout until gaps are resolved or mitigated.

Outreach Templates:

These templates are designed to get procurement-grade answers quickly, without back-and-forth.

Template 1: Security overview request (procurement checklist)

Subject: Security overview request for recruiting data

Body:

Hi team — We’re reviewing Heartbeat.ai for recruiting use. Please share a security overview covering access control (roles/least privilege), encryption scope (in transit/at rest for our data flows), audit logs (exports/admin/auth events), incident response (high-level), subprocessors, and retention/deletion expectations. If details aren’t public, note what’s available on request. Thanks.

Template 2: Evidence follow-up (exports + logging)

Subject: Follow-up: export controls and audit logs

Body:

Can you confirm whether audit logs capture (1) exports, (2) permission changes, (3) admin actions, and (4) authentication events? Please provide sample log fields and retention approach, and confirm how exports are permissioned and monitored.

Template 3: Corrections + transparency workflow (trust signal)

Subject: Corrections request workflow + change log pattern

Body:

For our trust review, please describe your corrections request workflow (how we report issues, how they’re triaged, and how we receive updates). Also share your change log pattern (date, what changed, why) and a “report an issue” intake link if available.

Common pitfalls

• Vague answers instead of controls: if you can’t map a statement to access control, encryption scope, audit logs, incident response, subprocessors, or retention, it’s not procurement-ready.
• Not separating in-product vs process: this creates accidental over-claims and slows approvals. Keep the separation explicit.
• Ignoring exports: exports are often the real data egress path in recruiting. If exports aren’t permissioned and logged, you don’t have governance.
• Not clarifying shared responsibility: even strong vendor controls won’t help if user offboarding, export policy, and acceptable use aren’t enforced internally.
• No transparency loop: without a corrections intake and change log pattern, issues linger and trust erodes across recruiting and IT.

How to improve results

To improve security outcomes without slowing recruiting, focus on the operational loop: permissions, logging, review, and transparency.

• Design roles around tasks: sourcing vs outreach vs ops vs leadership. Avoid default export rights.
• Make audit logs usable: decide who can request logs, who reviews export activity, and how exceptions are handled.
• Operationalize the transparency loop (uniqueness hook): implement a corrections request workflow with a tracked intake (requester, issue type, affected record/page, evidence link, desired correction, internal owner). Maintain a visible change log pattern with Date, What changed, Why so procurement can see how trust updates are handled over time.
• Keep artifacts ready: store the vendor’s overview, role matrix, incident response overview, and subprocessor list in your procurement system so renewals don’t restart from zero.

Legal and ethical use

Heartbeat.ai is intended for legitimate recruiting operations. Your organization is responsible for complying with applicable privacy and data laws, honoring opt-out requests, and applying internal policies for acceptable use. Nothing on this page is legal advice, and we do not make legal claims about your compliance posture.

Evidence and trust notes

How we evaluate and publish trust information: Heartbeat.ai trust methodology.

We aim to keep this page aligned with “helpful content” expectations: clear scope, operational detail, and no filler. Reference: Google Search Central: Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content.

Procurement evidence pack (available on request):

• Role/permission matrix
• Encryption scope summary
• Audit log field list and retention statement
• Incident response overview and escalation contacts
• Subprocessor list
• Retention/deletion summary
• Corrections intake description and change log pattern

Last reviewed: This page is updated as controls and documentation evolve; request the latest evidence pack if you need a point-in-time snapshot for your file.

If you need any of the above, contact us: Heartbeat.ai contact page.

FAQs

What should a security overview include for recruiting data?

At minimum: access control (least privilege), encryption scope for your data flows, audit logs for sensitive actions (especially exports and permission changes), incident response (high-level), subprocessors, and retention/deletion expectations.

What evidence should procurement request from Heartbeat.ai?

Request a role/permission matrix, encryption scope summary, audit log coverage (exports/admin/auth events) with sample fields and retention, incident response overview and escalation contacts, subprocessor list, retention/deletion summary, and the corrections/change log workflow. If details aren’t public, they’re available on request.

Why are exports and permission changes treated as high risk?

Because they’re common paths for unintended data exposure. If exports and permission changes aren’t permissioned and logged, it’s hard to investigate incidents or enforce internal policy.

How can we speed up vendor risk review without slowing recruiting?

Use a short checklist: confirm least privilege roles, confirm export logging, confirm encryption scope for your data flows, confirm incident response escalation contacts, confirm subprocessors and retention expectations, and file the evidence for renewals.

What should we ask for to complete a vendor risk questionnaire?

Ask for a security overview, role matrix, encryption scope summary, audit log field list and retention, incident response overview, subprocessor list, retention/deletion summary, and how corrections are reported and documented (change log pattern).

What does “available on request” mean in procurement terms?

It means the detail or artifact isn’t published publicly, but can be provided directly to your procurement/IT team for review and filing (for example: a role matrix, encryption scope summary, or subprocessor list).

Next steps

• Run the Micro-Asset: Weighted Checklist internally to identify approval blockers.
• Send the Micro-Asset: Outreach Templates to collect procurement-grade evidence quickly.
• Start an evaluation: sign up for Heartbeat.ai.

About the Author

Ben Argeband is the Founder and CEO of Swordfish.ai and Heartbeat.ai. With deep expertise in data and SaaS, he has built two successful platforms trusted by over 50,000 sales and recruitment professionals. Ben’s mission is to help teams find direct contact information for hard-to-reach professionals and decision-makers, providing the shortest route to their next win. Connect with Ben on LinkedIn.