Official Implementation of Ministry of Public Security Order No.176 in 2026: What New Compliance Requirements Apply to Enterprise Campus Networks

Effective October 1, 2026, the Measures for the Supervision and Inspection of Cyberspace Security by Public Security Organs (Ministry of Public Security Order No.176) comes into force, repealing the former Ministry of Public Security Order No.151 issued in 2018. Compared with the previous regulation focused mainly on internet security inspection, the new rule expands supervision scope to cover cybersecurity, data security and information security. Multiple parties including network operators, data processors and personal information handlers are subject to inspection.

This means enterprise campus compliance cannot only focus on WiFi real-name authentication for employees. Office networks, guest networks, IoT, video surveillance, access control, servers and all connected terminals must be re-evaluated across identity management, logging, network defense and data security.

I. Enterprise Campus Network Compliance Shifts from “Having Equipment” to “Traceable and Auditable”

The new regulation authorizes public security authorities to conduct online patrols via network information inspection and vulnerability scanning. Remote vulnerability detection and penetration testing may be performed on eligible network facilities and information systems, followed by on-site verification if risks are identified.

For enterprise campuses, compliance has three major changes:

Inspection scope expanded: Campus network security is no longer limited to egress devices

Order No.176 defines eight categories of inspected entities, including network operators, builders, maintainers, data processors, personal information handlers and network product/service providers.

Office networks, production networks, IoT terminals, video surveillance and access control systems within the campus are all part of cybersecurity management. Legacy inspection methods that only check egress firewalls and internet behavior management devices are no longer sufficient.

Inspection requirements refined: Identity, logs and security controls must be verifiable

Key inspection items include network filing, cybersecurity management systems, user registration and internet log retention, classified protection obligations, anti-virus and cyberattack safeguards, vulnerability remediation, data security and personal information protection.

Enterprises must prove not only that security devices exist, but also answer: who accessed the network, when, what resources were visited, how anomalies are handled, and whether relevant records can be retrieved quickly.

II. Three Most Commonly Overlooked Compliance Gaps in Enterprise Campuses

WiFi real-name authentication ≠ full network identity traceability

Many campuses deploy Portal authentication for employee and guest WiFi. However, campuses host a large number of dumb terminals such as cameras, access controllers, printers and conference equipment.

These devices do not use traditional account-password login. If only WiFi users are authenticated without unified identity management for wired and wireless terminals, the network will have blind spots: human users have records, but devices lack identities.

AINOPOL implements terminal identity binding, 802.1X authentication and device whitelisting. Network access changes from “plug and play” to “identity-verified before access”. For dumb terminals such as cameras and access controllers unsuitable for complex authentication, port binding and device fingerprint admission control block unauthorized rogue devices.

Having logs ≠ usable logs that meet compliance standards

Order No.176 explicitly requires retention of user registration records and internet access logs. A widespread campus issue is log fragmentation: authentication systems store one set of records, egress routers store another, and servers maintain separate logs. When security incidents occur, it becomes difficult to quickly correlate user, terminal, IP, timestamp and access behavior into a complete audit trail.

Campus network architecture must unify authentication, access and audit. AINOPOL’s solution enables unified authentication and log auditing for user and terminal access, paired with local tamper-proof storage. Logs are not merely archived; they support fast lookup of network actors and activities for inspection.

Intranet security cannot rely solely on the egress firewall

Order No.176 mandates technical safeguards against computer viruses, network attacks and intrusions, plus timely remediation of vulnerabilities and hidden risks.

For enterprise campuses, threats do not always originate from the public internet. Weak passwords, vulnerabilities and abnormal connections on office PCs, business servers and IoT devices can become entry points for lateral movement after a breach.

Built on all-optical networks, AINOPOL integrates firewalls, security zones, WAF, intrusion prevention and terminal isolation. Office, server, guest and IoT services are segmented independently. If one terminal is compromised, lateral access is restricted to contain risk spread.

III. Upgrade from “Working Network” to “Manageable, Auditable and Defendable Network”

Order No.176 does not simply require enterprises to purchase extra security hardware. It demands the network infrastructure itself support robust identity and security management.

AINOPOL all-optical campus solutions combine fiber access, unified authentication, terminal control, log auditing and security protection. It reduces the complexity of traditional copper cabling and dispersed equipment in weak current rooms, while enabling isolated, controllable services on demand.

Example workflow:

• Employee terminals access office resources after identity authentication
• Guest networks are fully isolated
• Dumb terminals such as cameras and access controllers connect via whitelisting or port binding
• Server systems are protected by security zones and WAF
• Abnormal connections can be traced quickly via logs

This is the core reason enterprises upgrade legacy networks to converged all-optical & security networks.

IV. Integrated Communication & Security: Extend Campus Security Beyond Access Control

For R&D parks, manufacturing campuses and multi-site enterprises, identity authentication and log retention alone are insufficient. Security of core business data during transmission is equally critical.

AINOPOL’s integrated communication & security architecture uses the all-optical network as the underlying transport layer, embedding security capabilities alongside data transmission. Office, production, audio-video and data services run on a unified infrastructure. Sensitive business data receives tiered protection through encryption, access control and security zoning, eliminating the complexity of adding separate security appliances after network deployment.

Campus network construction evolves from simple cabling to a complete system with verifiable identities, controllable terminals, traceable behaviors, defendable risks and protected data.

Order No.176 does not enforce a single network architecture for all enterprises. It clarifies security obligations for network operators. Enterprises need to reorganize capabilities scattered across authentication, switching, egress, security appliances and log systems. Networks must evolve from basic connectivity to a state with verified identities, complete records, active defense and traceability.

With all-optical network as foundation, paired with identity authentication, terminal admission, log auditing, security zones, WAF and integrated communication & security, enterprises can meet cyberspace security inspection requirements and reserve stable network infrastructure for future digital campus expansion.

FAQ

Q: Does an enterprise campus fall under the inspection scope of Order No.176?
A: Yes. Campus operators are network operators and public internet service providers. Any entity operating networks, processing data or handling personal information is subject to inspection. Even non-internet enterprises are included if they run networks or process data.

Q: What new inspection items are added by Order No.176 compared with Order No.151?
A: Compared with Order No.151, Order No.176 adds obligations for data security protection, personal information protection and algorithm security subject responsibility. Among the 11 key inspection items in Article 7, Item 10 — “fulfilling data security and personal information protection obligations” — was entirely absent in Order No.151.