Struggling with Public Security Audit Reports? Building a Log Export & Traceability Solution for Carriers Under Order 176

Many regional carriers have completed broadband coverage and user access deployment, yet stable network operation does not equate to robust cybersecurity management. Many legacy broadband projects still deploy traditional optical modems and basic network hardware, lacking full capabilities for real-name authentication, internet access log retention, audit query and record export.

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 tightens oversight over cybersecurity protection, retention of user registration data and internet access logs. For carriers without these capabilities, the main challenge lies not only in understanding regulatory requirements, but also in retrofitting existing networks and building long-term log management mechanisms.

AINOPOL delivers tailored technical solutions and project support for carriers, turning fragmented authentication, log management and traceability workflows into deliverable projects, and helping carriers upgrade their cybersecurity service capacity.

I. Why Carriers Fail to Deliver Log Audits Even with Network Infrastructure

1. Legacy devices lack full authentication and logging functions

Most broadband networks were built years ago. On-site optical modems only handle user access and data forwarding, without built-in real-name authentication, log management or audit export functions. Full-scale hardware replacement would drive up costs and disrupt existing subscriber services.

Carriers therefore face a core dilemma: how to add missing functions without overhauling the existing network.

2. Raw logs do not guarantee complete traceability

Even if some devices generate operational logs, the records often fail official inspection. User accounts, login timestamps, IP addresses and internet access logs are scattered across disjointed systems with no unified correlation mechanism, making query procedures extremely cumbersome.

Regional carriers without dedicated cybersecurity teams struggle to quickly identify required data, filter records, export files and cross-verify results when receiving ad-hoc audit requests. The real bottleneck is not insufficient log data, but the absence of a sustainable log management and traceability system.

3. In-house development brings high costs and insufficient professional O&M

Real-name authentication platforms, log management systems and security appliances span multiple technical domains. If carriers handle procurement, system integration and maintenance independently, they need to allocate resources for product selection, system interconnection, on-site implementation and ongoing support.

This creates heavy burdens for regional carriers with scattered project footprints and limited technical staff: high upfront investment, long implementation cycles and difficult post-deployment maintenance. Partnering with vendors with mature products and delivery capacity can drastically reduce integration complexity and lay the groundwork for replicating projects across regions.

II. Two AINOPOL Solutions to Upgrade Carriers’ Log Management

1. Reuse legacy networks: Cloud Portal + Cloud Audit for existing optical modems

For broadband projects with deployed carrier-grade optical modems, prioritize device compatibility evaluation. AINOPOL’s Cloud Portal and Cloud Audit solution adds real-name authentication and log management via plug-in integration, avoiding large-scale hardware replacement.

The Cloud Portal handles user authentication workflows, while the Cloud Audit system manages log data. After integration, administrators can query, filter and export user records and logs to support official audit requirements.

This model is ideal for legacy broadband rectification, retrofitting distributed access points, and compliance upgrades built on existing network infrastructure. Pre-implementation checks include optical modem model verification, open interface status, platform compatibility and log collection scope. The delivery phase validates authentication, log query and export workflows end-to-end.

For carriers, this solution maximizes existing network assets and adds missing capabilities with minimal investment.

2. New deployments or network restructuring: M1 Dream Gateway

If legacy hardware cannot support plug-in integration, or the project requires full network border re-planning, the AINOPOL M1 Dream Gateway is the optimal choice.

The M1 Dream Gateway natively integrates Portal authentication, log retention and cybersecurity protection. It supports multiple authentication modes plus built-in IPS, WAF and antivirus modules. Local log storage supports a 6-month retention period, fully meeting log preservation compliance requirements. Specific deployment must be validated against regulatory rules, log categories and device configurations.

Compared with patching functions across multiple discrete devices, the all-in-one gateway enables unified planning for user authentication, network borders and log auditing, lowering O&M overhead caused by fragmented systems. Project delivery includes full verification of log query, export and permission controls to ensure reliable operation in live networks.

III. From Standalone Rectification to Regional Cooperation: Lowering Carriers’ Implementation Barriers

1. Standalone project cooperation: Resolve individual client pain points first

For enterprise clients with identified cybersecurity gaps, carriers provide customer resources, broadband networks and project entry points, while AINOPOL delivers product solutions, technical interconnection and full delivery support. The two parties select either the optical modem reuse plan or the Dream Gateway deployment based on the client’s live network conditions, and build full authentication and log management capabilities.

This model does not require carriers to build out a full technical team from the start. Teams can first master implementation workflows, clarify cost structures and delivery boundaries on single projects, then accumulate replicable project experience step by step.

2. Municipal or provincial-level cooperation: Standardized rollout across regions

For carriers with extensive coverage and large numbers of legacy broadband sites, municipal or provincial-level strategic cooperation is recommended. Carriers coordinate client resources and regional business rollout, while AINOPOL provides standardized product packages, technical training, implementation guidance and long-term after-sales support.

By sorting out existing device models, access scale and log management requirements across the network, we formulate differentiated deployment paths for different scenarios: reuse Cloud Portal + Cloud Audit for retrofittable sites, and deploy the M1 Dream Gateway for network border restructuring projects. We start with pilot projects, then scale up after successful validation, cutting redundant implementation work and long-term maintenance pressure.

This cooperation goes beyond simple hardware procurement. It helps carriers build sustainable cybersecurity service capacity and create new revenue streams by bundling compliance rectification with existing broadband services.

Faced with Order 176 mandates, regional carriers’ core pain point is not a lack of network coverage, but missing authentication, log management and traceability capabilities on existing infrastructure. Manual device-by-device log checks cannot keep up with growing audit demands, while full in-house development is constrained by tight budgets and limited technical manpower.

AINOPOL offers two technical paths tailored to live network conditions: plug-in Cloud Portal + Cloud Audit for legacy network reuse, and M1 Dream Gateway for new network construction. We support phased rollout ranging from single-site pilots to city-wide and province-wide bulk deployments.

Project acceptance should not end with hardware installation alone. We must verify authentication workflows, log query, record export, access permission controls and long-term O&M mechanisms. By combining AINOPOL’s technical expertise with carriers’ customer resources, scattered compliance rectification tasks can be turned into implementable, maintainable and replicable projects, helping carriers close cybersecurity management gaps effectively.

FAQ

Q: What are the most frequent non-compliance issues raised in public security audit reports?
A: Most reports only list IP addresses and visited URLs without session-level binding between authenticated accounts and IP addresses. Inspectors require a complete user activity list filtered by mobile phone number, yet the system cannot generate matched records or link behavior to real users. Another common issue is incomplete log fields: missing NAT port ranges, MAC addresses, uplink/downlink traffic and other critical data make it impossible to trace an access record back to a specific terminal.

Q: What is the difference between log export & traceability solutions for carrier networks and private enterprise on-premises deployments?
A: Carrier networks adopt the Cloud Portal + Cloud Audit plug-in model: authentication runs on plug-ins, logs are correlated and stored in the cloud, and audit reports are generated on the cloud without deploying local log servers at each site. Private on-premises deployments use the Integrated Communication & Security architecture with Dream Gateways: authentication, local log retention and report export form a closed loop on a single physical device.

Q: What is the log retention period required under Order 176?
A: The baseline requirement under the Cybersecurity Law and Order 176 is no less than six months (180 days). The Cloud Audit system adopts rolling storage with a minimum 180-day retention window. Raw detailed logs for any day within the period can be retrieved and exported by account or time range.