Build a full data classification policy: commercial or government schema, per-level handling rules for storage, transit, access, disposal and labelling.
Most data classification policies fail for the same reason: they name the levels and stop. “Confidential” means nothing until someone can answer whether it may be emailed, where it may be stored, who approves access, how long it is kept and how it is destroyed. This tool builds the whole thing — a classification schema, a complete set of handling rules for every level across five control areas, compliance overlays that map regulated data types onto your levels, roles and responsibilities, and a review schedule — then exports it as a formatted PDF policy document.
It runs entirely in your browser, saves your progress locally, and requires no account. It is aimed at security leads, compliance managers and CISSP-track practitioners who need a defensible Domain 2 asset security artefact rather than a two-page template that an auditor will hand straight back.
The tool offers three starting points:
| Schema | Levels | Fits |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial | Restricted, Confidential, Internal, Public | Almost every private-sector organisation |
| Government / military | Top Secret, Secret, Confidential, Unclassified | National security contexts, where levels are defined by the damage disclosure would cause |
| Custom | Two to six levels you define | Organisations with an existing vocabulary they cannot change |
The government schema is worth understanding even if you never use it, because it is where the logic of classification is clearest: levels are defined by the expected consequence of unauthorised disclosure — exceptionally grave damage, serious damage, damage — rather than by who owns the file. Commercial schemes work best when written the same way, in terms of business impact rather than departmental ownership.
A practical warning on level count: four is the sweet spot. Two is too coarse to drive different handling. Six or more produces levels nobody can distinguish under pressure, and the failure mode of an over-granular scheme is that everything gets marked at the highest level, which is functionally the same as having no scheme at all.
For every level, the tool pre-populates and lets you edit fifteen specific rules across five areas. This is the section that turns a label into an enforceable control.
Every field is editable. The defaults are deliberately opinionated so that you are correcting a real policy rather than filling in a blank one.
The overlay step maps regulated data types onto your levels so the policy answers the question an auditor will ask: where does this regulated category sit in your scheme?
| Framework | Data types mapped | What drives the minimum level |
|---|---|---|
| HIPAA | Protected Health Information, electronic PHI | Security Rule safeguards at 45 CFR 164.308–312, including access control, audit controls and transmission security |
| PCI-DSS | Cardholder data, sensitive authentication data | Sensitive authentication data must not be retained after authorisation; PAN must be rendered unreadable wherever stored |
| GDPR | Personal data, special category data, biometric and genetic data | Article 9 special categories require an additional lawful condition and, in practice, stronger handling than ordinary personal data |
| CMMC | Controlled Unclassified Information, Federal Contract Information | CUI protection requirements derive from NIST SP 800-171; FCI from the basic safeguarding requirements in FAR 52.204-21 |
| SOX | Financial reporting data, internal controls documentation | Integrity and change control over the records supporting financial statements |
Enable the frameworks that apply and the mapping table appears in both the preview and the exported policy. The mappings are defaults reflecting common practice, not regulatory instructions — adjust the minimum level where your own risk assessment says otherwise, and record why.
The policy assigns four roles, and getting these named — with actual people behind them — is what separates a policy that operates from one that exists.
Two further points that policies routinely omit and auditors routinely ask about. First, reclassification: data changes value over time, and a scheme with no downgrade path accumulates restricted data forever. Say who may downgrade and on what basis. Second, aggregation: individually innocuous records can become sensitive in bulk — a single delivery address is Internal, the full customer address file is not. State that aggregation may raise the classification level, or your scheme will be wrong at exactly the moment it matters.
Four. Enough to drive genuinely different handling, few enough that staff can apply them without a decision tree. If you find yourself needing a fifth, check first whether the real problem is a missing handling rule rather than a missing level.
No. It is an informational aid producing a draft document, not legal advice, and a policy is only one element of a control. Frameworks test whether the policy is approved, communicated, and operating — meaning labelled data, enforced access, evidence of reviews. Have counsel or your compliance lead review before adoption.
Widely. ISO 27001 addresses information classification and labelling in its Annex A controls; SOC 2 relies on it under the confidentiality criteria and throughout logical access; HIPAA’s minimum necessary principle is unworkable without it; PCI-DSS depends on knowing exactly where cardholder data lives; and CMMC requires CUI to be identified and marked before it can be protected. It is also CISSP Domain 2 — asset security — in its entirety.
No, and trying is how programmes die. Set a default level for unlabelled data (Internal is the usual choice), then classify explicitly where it changes handling: regulated data, financial records, source code, customer content, HR files. The default catches the long tail.
In federal usage, security categorisation under FIPS 199 rates a system by the potential impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability — low, moderate or high — and drives the control baseline. Data classification labels the information itself by sensitivity. They interact, but a policy that conflates them will confuse anyone working to a NIST baseline.
Map their scheme to yours in the contract, and state the mapping in the policy. The frequent failure is receiving data labelled “Confidential” under a customer scheme that means something stricter than your “Confidential”, and handling it to your definition.
No. Everything stays in your browser — progress is saved to local storage on your device and the PDF is generated locally. Nothing is sent to us.
The classification policy sets the rules; other documents operationalise them. The security policy generator produces the acceptable use, access control and incident response policies that reference your levels. For the disposal rules, the media sanitization advisor gives the sanitisation method appropriate to each media type. To find where sensitive data already sits in documents you are about to share, use the PII redactor, and if GDPR retention drives your disposal periods, set them with the GDPR role and retention mapper.
Data classification is the process of organizing data into categories based on its sensitivity, value, and regulatory requirements. A classification framework assigns labels (such as Public, Internal, Confidential, Restricted) that determine how data must be handled, stored, transmitted, and disposed of throughout its lifecycle.
Data classification is the foundation of any data protection program. Without knowing what data you have and how sensitive it is, you cannot apply appropriate security controls, meet compliance obligations, or respond effectively to data breaches. Regulations including GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, and CMMC all require organizations to classify and protect data according to its sensitivity.
| Level | Description | Examples | Handling Requirements |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public | No harm if disclosed | Marketing materials, public website content | No restrictions |
| Internal | Low harm if disclosed externally | Internal policies, org charts, meeting notes | Access restricted to employees |
| Confidential | Significant harm if disclosed | Customer data, financial reports, source code | Encryption, access controls, NDA required |
| Restricted | Severe harm if disclosed | PII, PHI, payment card data, trade secrets | Strongest controls, encryption at rest and in transit, strict access |
| Regulation | Data Types | Required Classification |
|---|---|---|
| GDPR | Personal data of EU residents | Must identify and protect all personal data processing |
| HIPAA | Protected Health Information (PHI) | Must classify and safeguard all PHI |
| PCI DSS | Cardholder data | Must identify all locations where cardholder data is stored, processed, or transmitted |
| CMMC | Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) | Must classify and protect CUI per NIST 800-171 |
| SOX | Financial records | Must classify and protect financial reporting data |
The U.S. government uses four classification levels: Top Secret (exceptionally grave damage to national security), Secret (serious damage), Confidential (damage to national security), and Unclassified (no damage). Each level has specific handling, storage, transmission, and destruction requirements defined by Executive Order 13526.
Common commercial classification schemas include: Restricted (highest sensitivity - trade secrets, PII), Confidential (internal sensitive data - financial records, HR data), Internal (business use only - policies, procedures), and Public (freely shareable - marketing materials, press releases). Some organizations add a fifth "Critical" level.
Higher classification levels require stricter controls: encryption at rest and in transit (Restricted), access controls and audit logging (Confidential), basic access controls (Internal), and no special controls (Public). This tool lets you define specific handling rules for storage, transmission, disposal, and access at each level.
Data classification is foundational to compliance. HIPAA requires identifying PHI, PCI-DSS requires identifying cardholder data, GDPR requires identifying personal data, and CMMC requires identifying CUI. This tool provides compliance overlays that map classification levels to regulatory requirements for each framework.
The data owner (typically a business unit leader or executive) is responsible for classifying data based on its sensitivity and value. The data custodian (typically IT) implements the technical controls required by the classification. Data users must handle information according to its classification level.
Generate customized information security policies for your organization. Create Acceptable Use, Password, Incident Response, Access Control, Remote Work, and Data Classification policies tailored to your industry and compliance requirements.
Map GDPR data processing roles (Controller, Processor, Joint Controller), define data processing activities, calculate retention periods by data type and jurisdiction, select legal bases, assess pseudonymization needs, and generate Article 30 Records of Processing Activities.
Get NIST SP 800-88 aligned recommendations for media sanitization and destruction. Select media type, data sensitivity, and asset disposition to receive detailed procedures, verification methods, regulatory compliance guidance, and certificate of destruction templates.