Posted By : Mads Jakobsen 30.01.2026

Data Privacy Week: What to Look for in a Signing Tool

Introductory Note

Welcome to another G.O.A.T. Wizdom 🐐

We’re here to make you the Greatest Of All Time at running your business—especially when it comes to contracts. And since contracts often contain personal data, today’s mission is simple: sign smarter, safer, and with less risk.

Data Privacy Week: What to Look for in a Signing Tool

Data Privacy Day was January 28. But privacy isn’t a one-day celebration where we clap, post a lock emoji, and then go back to emailing PDFs like it’s 2009.

If you send contracts, offers, HR documents, NDAs, vendor agreements, or renewal terms, you’re almost certainly handling personal data—names, emails, job titles, signatures, sometimes addresses, salary info, or ID details.

That means your signing tool isn’t “just a productivity app.” It’s part of your data privacy and cyber security perimeter.

So let’s make sure you’re choosing (and using) a signing tool like a pro—whether you’re evaluating a new tool or doing a “security refresh” on the one you already have.

Below is a practical checklist you can use with any e-sign solution. No fear-mongering. No jargon soup. Just clear “this matters because…” guidance.

Why e-signing tools matter for privacy and security

Contracts are high-value documents:

• they include personal data
• they include business-sensitive terms (pricing, renewal dates, SLAs)
• they often get forwarded internally (“Can you approve this?”)
• they can live for years in inboxes, shared drives, and “FINAL_final_v7.pdf” folders

A good signing tool reduces risk by:

• controlling access
• tracking actions with evidence (audit trails)
• reducing email attachment chaos
• making retention and deletion manageable

A weak signing setup does the opposite: it creates dark corners where sensitive data lives without visibility or control.

The “No Regrets” Signing Tool Checklist (Data Privacy + Cyber Security)

Here’s what to look for. Think of it like a quick vendor/security review you can run in under 30 minutes.

1) Audit trail: Can you prove what happened?

If something goes wrong—disputes, compliance questions, “who approved this?”, or “did they actually sign?”—the audit trail is your receipt.

Look for:

• a detailed log of events (sent, viewed, signed, completed)
• timestamps
• signer identity signals (email/verification method)
• document version info (what exactly was signed)
• the ability to export/download the audit trail and store it with the agreement

Red flags:

• “audit trail” exists, but is vague or not exportable
• no clear record of who did what (or when)
• you can’t tie a signature to a specific document version

G.O.A.T. move: Treat your audit trail like you treat your accounting records: it should be clear, complete, and retrievable.

2) Access control: Who can see what (and who can’t)?

Privacy is often less about hackers and more about accidental oversharing:

• wrong person gets the doc
• old employee still has access
• “anyone with the link” becomes the default setting

Look for:

• role-based permissions (admin, manager, sender, viewer)
• restrictions on who can send on behalf of the organization
• controls for internal viewers (e.g., approvals without broad access)
• admin visibility: who accessed what, and when

Red flags:

• “everyone is an admin” culture (even if it’s convenient)
• no clean way to limit document visibility internally
• no logs for admin actions

G.O.A.T. move: Apply the least privilege principle. People should have the minimum access needed to do their job—nothing more.

3) Link security: Are signing links protected, expiring, and configurable?

A signing link is powerful because it’s simple. But simplicity must come with control.

Look for:

• link expiration options (days/hours)
• authentication options (email verification, SMS, etc. depending on use case)
• ability to re-send safely without creating “multiple active versions”
• controls that prevent forwarding from becoming uncontrolled access

Red flags:

• “public link” style sharing with no controls
• links that never expire
• no way to revoke access once sent

G.O.A.T. move: Use expiring signing links for time-sensitive agreements (renewals, offers) and tighten authentication for higher-risk docs (HR, sensitive personal data).

4) Data retention & deletion: Can you control lifecycle (not hoard forever)?

This is the most underrated privacy win: keeping data longer than necessary increases risk. If you never delete anything, you’re not “organized”—you’re building a bigger target.

Look for:

• configurable retention periods
• admin tools for deletion and archival
• clarity on what happens after deletion (is it truly removed or just hidden?)
• export options so you can retain what you legally need while deleting what you don’t

Red flags:

• unclear retention policy (“we keep it… forever?”)
• no ability to delete documents or user data
• retention is only “manual effort” (aka nobody will do it)

G.O.A.T. move: Align retention with your reality:

• sales agreements: keep for contract term + legal buffer
• HR docs: follow your local requirements
• expired drafts: delete aggressively

5) Compliance mindset: Is it built like a grown-up tool?

This one is less about collecting certifications like Pokemon cards and more about: Does the vendor act like security matters day-to-day?

Look for:

• clear documentation about security practices
• transparent policies about data processing and privacy
• support for compliance workflows (exporting records, responding to requests, admin controls)

Red flags:

• vague answers to simple security questions
• “trust us” language without documentation
• no clear way to handle privacy requests, retention, or access reviews

G.O.A.T. move: Ask yourself: If we had a security review tomorrow, could we defend this setup confidently?

Bonus checklist: Practical features that reduce risk in real life

Version control and “single source of truth”

You want one canonical agreement—not five PDFs in an email chain.

Look for:

• one final executed copy
• clear status (sent/viewed/signed/completed)
• ability to avoid duplicate parallel signing flows

Admin oversight (without micromanaging)

Your security posture improves when admins can:

• review access
• manage users
• revoke permissions
• track activity

Templates and standardized clauses

Standardization reduces mistakes. Mistakes cause breaches (or awkward apologies).

Common pitfalls (aka: how good teams accidentally get risky)

Pitfall 1: Emailing attachments back and forth

Email attachments are the #1 way documents end up: forwarded, downloaded, re-uploaded, duplicated, and stored indefinitely.

Better: Send a signing link with controlled access and a tracked audit trail.

Pitfall 2: “Anyone with the link” as default

Convenient? Yes. Safe? Not always.

Better: Use tighter access for sensitive docs, and set expirations.

Pitfall 3: Never reviewing retention

“Storage is cheap” is how you end up with 7 years of sensitive drafts.

Better: Delete drafts and expired negotiations, keep only what you must.

How to roll this out without starting a company-wide panic

You don’t need a six-month compliance project. Try this:

1. Pick one workflow (renewals, offers, vendor contracts)
2. Apply the checklist to that workflow
3. Tighten access + retention
4. Switch attachments → signing links
5. Repeat for the next workflow

Small changes compound into a strong security posture.

Actionable Takeaways

• Your signing tool is part of your security perimeter because contracts contain personal and sensitive business data
• Prioritize: audit trail, access control, link security, retention & deletion, and a compliance mindset
• Reduce risk by eliminating attachments and using controlled signing links
• Keep data only as long as necessary—and make deletion possible

🐐 G.O.A.T. Hack

Stop sending contracts as attachments. Send a signing link instead—then set:

• an expiration date
• appropriate signer authentication
• clear internal access rules

This one change alone reduces accidental sharing, version confusion, and “where did that PDF go?” drama.