How Full-Optical Networks Meet Traceability Requirements of Order 176: One Account for One Visitor, Logs Pinpoint Individuals

Enterprise campuses deploy visitor Wi-Fi to facilitate communication among clients, suppliers and partners. However, if multiple users share one network account, or authentication data cannot be correlated with internet access records, massive logs still cannot reconstruct specific online behaviors.

Effective October 1, 2026, Measures for the Supervision and Inspection of Cyberspace Security by Public Security Organs (MOPS Ministerial Order No.176) further clarifies requirements for cyberspace security supervision and inspection. Enterprises shall focus not only on reliable visitor network access, but also on the correlation among identity authentication, log recording and security incident traceability.

AINOPOL leverages full-optical networks, Portal real-name authentication, account privilege management and log auditing to help enterprises build a management workflow covering visitor identity verification and internet record query, making network traceability fully evidenced.

I. Why Traceability to Individuals Fails Even With Logs

1. Shared accounts disconnect identities from behaviors

If enterprises use a universal Wi-Fi password for a long time, visitors may access the network without separate authentication. Administrators can only confirm that a certain terminal has connected, but cannot identify the actual user. Even with recorded IP and MAC addresses, such information alone cannot directly prove who operated the device.

2. Separated authentication and logs complicate traceability

Some networks deploy independent authentication platforms, gateways and log systems, which may store inconsistent data. Once security incidents occur, administrators have to manually cross-reference accounts, IP addresses, device data and online/offline timestamps. Troubleshooting becomes cumbersome and prone to missing information.

3. Non-standard temporary account management leaves residual permissions

If visitor accounts remain active after visitors leave, subsequent users may reuse those privileges. For campuses with high personnel turnover, manual account creation and deactivation increases IT maintenance workload and creates management loopholes.

II. How AINOPOL Correlates Visitor Identities With Logs

1. One independent account per visitor; authentication prior to network access

AINOPOL supports Portal visitor authentication with WeChat QR-code scanning, SMS verification codes and other verification methods. Enterprises can verify visitor identities per internal rules and create an independent account or authentication record for each visitor to avoid long-term shared network credentials.

For temporary visitors, time-limited accounts can be configured to revoke permissions upon access expiry or after visits, lowering risks of leftover accounts. Independent accounts form a critical foundation for identity traceability, while specific identity verification workflows must comply with enterprise management policies and personal data protection regulations.

2. Link authentication data with internet logs for retrievable records

The core of real-name authentication is not merely storing login records, but binding authenticated identities with actual network sessions.

AINOPOL gateways and authentication auditing solutions record authenticated accounts, terminal MAC addresses, assigned IP addresses, online and offline timestamps, and support internet log queries. When anomalies arise, administrators can retrieve relevant records by account, time window or device information, eliminating repetitive cross-checking across separate systems.

Enterprises shall implement log collection, retention, integrity protection and query access control in accordance with applicable laws and business needs. Note that account records provide clues for incident investigation, and cannot alone identify actual operators; terminal logs and other evidence are required for comprehensive assessment.

3. Zoned control over full-optical networks to block unauthorized post-authentication access

Real-name authentication does not grant visitors access to all enterprise resources. AINOPOL full-optical networks adopt VLAN isolation, ONU port binding and access control policies to segregate visitor networks from office, R&D and production networks. Visitors only obtain basic internet access by default. Access to internal business systems will only be enabled upon formal approval.

Network zoning and privilege controls reduce risks of visitors’ compromised terminals directly accessing internal servers and core business systems. Combined authentication and network access records also accelerate anomaly investigation.

4. Integrated Communication & Security enables coordinated network and security development

Drawing on the coordinated authentication and logging capabilities of AINOPOL Dream Series Secure Optical Gateways, AINOPOL delivers the native integrated “Communication & Security” solution, with full-optical infrastructure as the foundation, audio & video services as the engine, and security as the protective shield. Built on full-optical campus network services, Dream Gateways provide firewall, IPS, WAF, AV antivirus and other security capabilities. Enterprises can systematically plan network access and security management, cutting configuration and maintenance burdens caused by dispersed multi-device deployment.

Unified planning of access links, account management and auditing policies improves daily O&M efficiency. It should be clarified that full-optical networks cannot automatically implement real-name traceability. Identity-behavior correlation relies on authentication systems, session records, log auditing and corresponding security policies.

III. Implementation Recommendations: Establish A Queryable, Verifiable Traceability Workflow

Enterprises may start by cleaning up existing visitor accounts and removing unnecessary shared public accounts. Next, enable independent authentication and time-limited authorization, and verify consistency of account, timestamp and terminal information across authentication and log systems. Finally, perform periodic spot checks of log retrieval functions to confirm records can be searched by account, IP address and time range, and define responsibilities for anomaly response.

For user registration data and internet access logs required by regulation, implement mandatory retention periods, access permissions and security safeguards to prevent log loss, unauthorized tampering or unsanctioned queries.

Enterprise visitor network management should go beyond simple connectivity, achieving identifiable identities, controllable privileges and traceable behaviors.

With Portal real-name authentication, account lifecycle management, log auditing and full-optical isolation capabilities, AINOPOL helps enterprises streamline visitor network management workflows. Following the Integrated Communication & Security architecture, network infrastructure and security management are deployed in tandem, delivering robust support for campus cybersecurity and daily operation & maintenance.

FAQ

Q: What specific traceability requirements are stipulated under Order 176?
A: Item 3 of Article 7 of Order 176 mandates inspection of whether user registration information and internet access logs are recorded and retained in accordance with law. The core criterion is one account per visitor with traceable real identity. Inspectors require a complete evidence chain of person – identity credential – network access, enabling tracing from any internet access log back to a specific real-name user, rather than fragmented IP access records.

Q: Why will traceability fail if authentication and log systems are deployed separately?
A: The authentication system records who logged on, while the log system records what a given IP did. Without underlying correlation between the two datasets, retrieving complete internet records for a specific visitor requires manual line-by-line comparison by timestamp, which is time-consuming and error-prone. AINOPOL’s solution integrates authentication and logging on one single gateway. Authentication account information is written into every log entry at the moment logs are generated, eliminating post-hoc matching.

Q: How long must logs be kept?
A: No less than 6 months (180 days). Dream Series Gateways are equipped with built-in hard disks for automatic rolling storage of 180-day complete internet logs. Log fields cover MAC address, IP address, authenticated account, session start & end time, accessed URL and uplink/downlink traffic. Logs are encrypted and cannot be directly modified once written.