Under Order 176: Traceable Internet Behaviors and How to Prevent Internal Network Lateral Movement

In enterprise cybersecurity, one risk is frequently overlooked: after an employee clicks a phishing link, attackers gain access to one office PC. Leveraging unrestricted internal network communication, they may scan other terminals, attempt to access file servers, business systems and even production equipment. By the time anomalies are detected, multiple devices may already be compromised.

MOPS Ministerial Order No.176, Measures for the Supervision and Inspection of Cyberspace Security by Public Security Organs, took effect on October 1, 2026. It lists retention of user registration information and internet access logs, protection against cyberattacks and intrusions, and remediation of vulnerabilities as key inspection priorities. For enterprises, cybersecurity is no longer limited to “retrieving logs after incidents”. Organizations must also identify abnormal behaviors, restrict unauthorized access, and contain the blast radius of breaches as much as possible.

So how to achieve traceable internet behaviors while blocking attackers from spreading laterally through the internal network? The core lies in combining identity management, network segmentation, access control and security auditing.

I. Core Challenges of Enterprise Internal Lateral Movement Attacks

1. Internet logs exist, yet full access chains cannot be reconstructed

Some enterprises have deployed internet behavior management or log auditing appliances, but their systems remain siloed. Logs may record an IP visiting external websites, yet fail to quickly map the activity to a specific terminal, access port and end user. Event investigation becomes far harder if terminal IP addresses change or shared accounts are used across devices.

Effective traceability correlates user identity, terminal details, IP address, access timestamp and network logs to reconstruct incident workflows. Logs must maintain integrity and comply with statutory requirements for retention and query management.

2. Default open internal network creates room for attack propagation

If office PCs, visitor terminals, surveillance cameras, access control systems and business servers operate in an environment without robust boundary controls, once one terminal is infected with malware, attackers can scan other endpoints and exploit weak passwords, unpatched vulnerabilities or overexposed services to penetrate deeper.

This risk cannot be resolved simply by upgrading bandwidth or replacing switches. Without proper internal access boundaries, even with firewalls deployed at the internet perimeter, attackers who breach the inner network can keep spreading along reachable communication paths.

3. Weak constraints on terminal access allow undetected unauthorized devices

Printers, cameras and access controllers in corporate networks often lack comprehensive security protection. If network ports remain permanently open, unregistered PCs or other hardware can connect freely. Many dumb terminals cannot host security agents and easily become blind spots for governance.

Enterprises need to control not only who can access the network, but also which devices are permitted to connect and what resources they can reach. The old assumption “devices connected to the internal network are trusted by default” must be discarded.

II. How AINOPOL Reduces Lateral Movement Risks Through Network Architecture

1. Segment full-optical networks to limit attacker reach

For office, visitor, surveillance, access control and production scenarios, enterprises can design independent network zones aligned with business relationships. VLAN partitioning, access policies and security boundaries control communications between different segments.

It should be noted that VLAN segmentation alone does not eliminate all security risks. Cross-zone access requires firewall rules and access control lists to explicitly define permitted communication endpoints and ports, cutting unnecessary lateral access paths.

2. Strengthen network access control (NAC) to block unknown devices

For office PCs, identity authentication and NAC can be deployed based on business requirements. For dumb terminals such as cameras and access controllers that cannot install client software, adopt compatible access authentication, port binding and dedicated network partitions to mitigate risks of unauthorized hardware replacement or unsanctioned connections.

Enterprises should periodically audit terminal asset inventories, clean up accounts of resigned staff, disable idle ports and remove unauthorized devices. Only by binding terminal identity to access privileges can organizations reduce opportunities for attackers to infiltrate via unknown endpoints.

3. Combine identity authentication with least privilege principle to block unauthorized access

AINOPOL implements differentiated permission management for users and terminals via identity authentication, network segmentation and access policies. For example, regular office terminals only gain access to business resources required for daily work; visitor terminals cannot reach internal management systems; maintenance staff can only access designated equipment within authorized scopes.

Critical business systems should deploy native identity authentication, permission management and security safeguards. Network segmentation cannot bear the full burden of security defense by itself. Restricting access scope limits lateral movement even if one terminal gets compromised.

4. Integrate log auditing and network O&M to accelerate incident traceability

At the network architecture layer, gateway logs, authentication records, terminal access data and security alerts help operators correlate timestamps, destination addresses, related terminals and network zones. Once abnormal connections are detected on a device, administrators can investigate its access paths, affected business assets and other suspicious endpoints, and isolate, block or adjust policies promptly.

AINOPOL’s full-optical network O&M capabilities support device status visualization, access relationship troubleshooting and fault localization. It should be clarified that network topology and operation records cannot replace professional security scanning, yet they help administrators clarify network structures and shorten investigation cycles.

5. Build on the Integrated Communication & Security foundation to balance connectivity and security

As office, surveillance and production services expand, networks must support growing terminals and traffic while providing stable infrastructure for identity authentication, zone isolation and security auditing.

AINOPOL’s Integrated Communication & Security solution takes full-optical infrastructure as the foundation, audio & video services as the engine, and security as the protective shield. Firewall capabilities are natively embedded within Dream Gateways instead of stacking separate networking and security hardware.

Built-in IPS, WAF and antivirus AV capabilities perform granular filtering of inter-zone traffic and block malicious access, restraining lateral penetration at network boundaries. Networking and security requirements are planned holistically. For campus and manufacturing sites, hybrid optical-electrical cables can be evaluated to reduce deployment and maintenance complexity for remote terminals, subject to distance, power supply and business layout requirements.

In response to cybersecurity requirements under Order 176, enterprises should not merely check whether logs exist. They also need to verify log query availability, terminal identification, network segmentation and timely response to abnormal access.

Based on full-optical networks, AINOPOL combines NAC, service isolation, access control and O&M management to help enterprises build clear network boundaries. Against lateral movement threats, effective defense does not rely on hoping attacks never happen. It aims to block unauthorized devices from connecting, limit compromised terminals from reaching other zones, and retain sufficient evidence for investigation and remediation once anomalies emerge.

When network architecture, access permissions and auditing mechanisms work in tandem, enterprises can simultaneously boost traceability of internet behaviors and protection against internal lateral attacks. Security management evolves from simple activity logging toward active risk control.

FAQ

Q: Are logs for internal business access also required to be retained?
A: Yes. Order 176 expands audit coverage from external internet access to internal business access, file exfiltration, cloud disk uploads and other scenarios. Records of which internal business systems employees access and which files are sent via email fall within the scope of retention and traceability.

Q: Can full-optical networks trace lateral movement activity back to specific individuals?
A: Yes. Full-optical networks record online time, MAC addresses, IP addresses and traffic statistics for every terminal. Bottom-layer session binding technology natively links terminal access behavior with authentication credentials. When abnormal access is detected, administrators can instantly pinpoint the access port, terminal MAC address and authenticated account.

Q: Is storing logs enough to achieve compliance if logs cannot be retrieved?
A: No. Order 176 requires a complete auditable and forensically sound evidence chain. Logs must not only be stored, but also quickly filtered and exported by account, time period or access location. AINOPOL’s solution supports one-click export of unified reports for on-site retrieval during public security inspections.