<\/span><\/h2>\nThis is for Procurement + IT reviewers<\/strong> 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.<\/p>\n<\/span>Quick Answer<\/span><\/h2>\n\n- Core Answer<\/dt>\n
- Validate access control, encryption scope, audit logs, incident response, subprocessor transparency, and retention\/deletion for recruiting data\u2014then require a corrections workflow and change log to keep trust current.<\/dd>\n
- Key Insight<\/dt>\n
- In recruiting tools, exports and permission changes are the highest-risk moments; if those aren\u2019t permissioned and logged, governance is mostly paperwork.<\/dd>\n
- Best For<\/dt>\n
- Procurement + IT reviewers running vendor risk review for recruiting workflows.<\/dd>\n<\/dl>\n
\nCompliance & Safety<\/strong><\/p>\nThis 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.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
<\/span>Framework: Procurement checklist tone (no hype)<\/span><\/h2>\nProcurement reviews stall when a vendor blurs what\u2019s implemented versus what\u2019s recommended. Use this structure to keep answers auditable. Control availability can vary by configuration; request the evidence pack for your review.<\/p>\n
<\/span>Scope & boundaries (what this page is and isn\u2019t)<\/span><\/h3>\n\n- This page covers:<\/strong> security controls and review artifacts relevant to recruiting data workflows.<\/li>\n
- This page does not replace:<\/strong> your organization\u2019s vendor risk questionnaire, legal review, or a signed security addendum.<\/li>\n
- Shared responsibility:<\/strong> your internal policies (user offboarding, export policy, acceptable use) matter as much as vendor controls.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
<\/span>Controls summary (Heartbeat.ai)<\/span><\/h3>\n\n- Access control:<\/strong> role-based access patterns and least-privilege intent for user permissions.<\/li>\n
- Audit logs:<\/strong> audit logging for key user and administrative actions (including exports and permission changes) to support investigations and internal review.<\/li>\n
- Incident response:<\/strong> a defined process for triage, containment, communication, and remediation (high-level).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
<\/span>Recommended controls (buyer checklist)<\/span><\/h3>\n\n- Encryption scope:<\/strong> confirm encryption in transit and at rest for your specific data flows; request scope and evidence.<\/li>\n
- Export governance:<\/strong> restrict exports by role, log exports, and review export activity on a defined cadence.<\/li>\n
- Subprocessor transparency:<\/strong> maintain a current list of subprocessors and what they do.<\/li>\n
- Retention & deletion:<\/strong> define retention windows and deletion expectations for recruiting data and audit logs.<\/li>\n
- Corrections workflow:<\/strong> a clear \u201creport an issue\u201d intake and a visible change log pattern (date, what changed, why).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
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\u2019re available on request<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/span>Step-by-step method<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/span>1) Define your recruiting data scope (so controls map to reality)<\/span><\/h3>\nBefore you send a questionnaire, write down what you consider \u201crecruiting data\u201d in your environment. Typical categories:<\/p>\n
![\"54166\"](\"http:\/\/hc.heartbeat.ai\/wp-content\/webp-express\/webp-images\/uploads\/2026\/02\/security-overview-a81384b5.png.webp\")
<\/p>\n