The sub-processor list functions as the disclosure vehicle for changes to Snowflake's authorized sub-processors; the document does not itself specify the notice period or objection procedure available to customers when new sub-processors are added, as those terms are typically contained in the governing Data Processing Addendum.
This analysis describes what Snowflake's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
Under GDPR Article 28, processors must give controllers the opportunity to object to sub-processor changes before they take effect; the absence of a notice period or objection procedure within this document means enterprise customers must locate and enforce those rights through their DPA, creating a dependency on separately negotiated contractual terms.
Interpretive note: The document was truncated and may contain notification or change procedure language not captured in the available source text; this assessment is based on the absence of such language in the portions reviewed.
The document does not specify the advance notice period Snowflake provides before engaging a new sub-processor or the procedure by which customers may object; those operational details are governed by the customer's Data Processing Addendum with Snowflake, which may vary by contract.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Sub-processor Change Notification Mechanism and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Monitoring
Snowflake has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: GDPR Article 28(2) requires that processors inform controllers of any intended changes to sub-processors and provide the controller an opportunity to object. This list, as a disclosure document, satisfies the identification requirement but does not address the procedural mechanism. The UK GDPR imposes equivalent requirements. Enforcement authority rests with EU supervisory authorities and the UK ICO. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. The absence of notice period and objection procedure language within this document means customers cannot determine their rights solely from reviewing this list. If the governing DPA does not specify an adequate notice period, the customer's ability to exercise sub-processor objection rights may be practically limited, which could create a compliance gap under GDPR Article 28. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK customers bear the highest exposure, as GDPR and UK GDPR impose affirmative controller rights regarding sub-processor changes. Customers whose DPAs were executed under older standard contractual clause frameworks should verify that the objection mechanism aligns with current GDPR Article 28 requirements following the 2021 updated SCCs. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Procurement and legal teams should review the DPA to confirm the notice period for sub-processor additions (commonly 30 days in the industry) and the contractual consequences if the customer objects. Where the DPA does not specify an objection procedure, customers may wish to seek a DPA amendment. Organizations should establish an internal workflow to monitor this list for changes and to initiate the objection process within any contractual window. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams should implement a monitoring process for changes to this sub-processor list, as updates to the list may trigger contractual rights and compliance obligations. An internal escalation process should be defined so that newly identified sub-processors can be assessed against data flow maps and transfer mechanism requirements within the applicable notice window under the DPA.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 3 platforms + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
Under GDPR Article 28, processors must give controllers the opportunity to object to sub-processor changes before they take effect; the absence of a notice period or objection procedure within this document means enterprise customers must locate and enforce those rights through their DPA, creating a dependency on separately negotiated contractual terms.
The document does not specify the advance notice period Snowflake provides before engaging a new sub-processor or the procedure by which customers may object; those operational details are governed by the customer's Data Processing Addendum with Snowflake, which may vary by contract.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Snowflake.