Joint Inspection: Cybersecurity Protection Drills + MPS Order No.176

AINOPOL Assists Telecom Carriers in Conducting Factory Network Compliance Self-Checks

As national cybersecurity protection drills continue, and Measures for Cyberspace Security Supervisory Inspection by Public Security Organs (MPS Order No.176) takes effect on October 1, 2026, cybersecurity inspections have evolved beyond basic device defence. They now cover user identity management, log retention, enforcement of security policies and risk rectification across the whole chain.

Most telecom carriers have built basic broadband networks for enterprise clients, yet existing hardware and service packages often fail to meet all compliance requirements under Order No.176. Typical gaps include missing real-name authentication and log auditing functions on access devices, incomplete log collection, and inadequate security controls on the client side. When cybersecurity drills overlap with regulatory inspections, carriers will face surging rectification demands, insufficient technical support and higher project delivery risks.

For carriers, this is both a service gap to fill and a new business opportunity in government & enterprise cybersecurity services. Teaming up with hardware vendors, AINOPOL delivers integrated network & security solutions. We support carriers in factory and industrial park compliance self-inspections and rectification via two cooperation models: single-project delivery and provincial/municipal branch-wide rollout.

I. Practical Challenges Carriers Face Under Dual Inspections

1. Legacy network hardware lacks full compliance capabilities

Carriers provide broadband connectivity, but internet access does not automatically come with real-name authentication and log archiving. Many older factory networks still rely on basic routers, optical modems and layer-2 switches without unified access control or traceable log query systems.

During inspections, failure to produce complete audit records or proof of technical safeguards will trigger mandatory rechecks. Networks built in different years vary widely in configuration, forcing carriers into rushed emergency rectification right before inspection deadlines.

2. Multi-vendor, multi-service networks raise inspection complexity

Factory campuses run parallel networks: office IT, production OT, video surveillance, access control and visitor Wi-Fi, with hardware sourced from carriers, system integrators and multiple manufacturers. Carriers control the broadband egress and access links but cannot independently complete end-to-end internal security audits.

• Cybersecurity drills focus on vulnerability scanning, abnormal access tracking and anti-hacking defences.
• MPS Order No.176 audits cover network governance, user registration and full log retention.

Combined inspections require more than standalone device maintenance; clients need a holistic solution covering network architecture, access control, boundary protection and audit trail management.

II. AINOPOL’s Solution to Fill Carriers’ Compliance Gaps

Based on on-site network conditions, AINOPOL designs targeted rectification plans and coordinates hardware vendors to complete device adaptation, configuration verification and engineering implementation, forming a closed loop: risk discovery → technical rectification → post-modification re-verification.

1. Supplement real-name authentication and log auditing

For networks without identity verification and audit functions, we deploy Cloud Portal and Cloud Audit to integrate with existing optical modems and access devices, minimising large-scale network reconstruction.

After deployment, the system fulfills statutory requirements: visitor real-name authentication, full internet log collection, long-term storage and quick retrieval. For projects with existing authentication systems, we verify three key points:

1. Whether identity data can be correlated with online behaviour logs;
2. Whether log records are complete and tamper-proof;
3. Whether audit data can be exported into standard compliance reports.

2. Strengthen boundary isolation & terminal access control for factories

To resolve the mixing of IT office networks, OT production networks, surveillance networks and visitor networks, we implement layered safeguards on top of the existing topology:

• Segment independent security domains via VLAN hard isolation and ACL policies to block cross-domain lateral movement of ransomware and hacking traffic;
• Enforce ONU port binding and MAC whitelisting to prevent unauthorised private routers and rogue terminals from accessing the industrial network;
• Deploy Dream Gateway with IPS, WAF and anti-virus modules on internet egress and remote maintenance channels to block exploits and malicious traffic.

AINOPOL sorts out overall requirements while partner vendors conduct device testing and adaptation.

Important note: No single piece of hardware can fully satisfy all regulatory clauses. The plan must be tailored to the actual network structure and legal requirements.

III. Two Cooperation Modes Between AINOPOL and Carriers

1. Single-project cooperation: Address rectification demands case by case

This model targets factory clients with identified compliance gaps or ongoing pre-inspection self-checks for cybersecurity drills.

• Carrier responsibilities: Customer development, broadband resource coordination and on-site project coordination.
• AINOPOL responsibilities: Site survey, solution design, product supply, technical support and vendor coordination for hardware adaptation.

The two parties jointly deliver authentication, log auditing, network isolation and boundary protection. This model keeps upfront investment low and validates solution feasibility quickly. Configuration templates and delivery workflows accumulated from individual projects can be reused for subsequent industrial park projects.

2. Provincial & municipal branch cooperation: Embed compliance services into the carrier’s official service catalogue

When multiple clients across cities face identical inspection pressures, we can launch formal cooperation with municipal or provincial carrier branches.

AINOPOL provides standardised scenario-based solution frameworks, product capability packages and unified technical support, helping carriers build standardised implementation and O&M procedures. Leveraging nationwide customer coverage, broadband infrastructure and local service teams, carriers can roll out compliance rectification services to factories and industrial parks at scale.

Compared with one-off project deals, branch-level cooperation eliminates repeated solution design across cities, unifies technical standards and cuts engineering costs. Business scope, delivery rules and commercial terms can be negotiated flexibly to match the carrier’s organisational structure.

Carriers should avoid last-minute emergency fixes right before inspections. Proactive inventory of existing client networks, identification of hardware capability gaps, and regular self-inspection & recheck mechanisms will help capture growing cybersecurity service demands.

AINOPOL works with telecom operators and equipment suppliers to offer flexible cooperation paths: from on-site technical support for individual clients to province-wide standardised service packages. Whether you need to add real-name authentication and log retention, or build IT/OT network isolation and boundary threat protection, we can deliver phased reconstruction plans based on existing network assets.

FAQ

Q: What violations lead to the most frequent official notifications under joint inspections?
A: Three high-risk issues appear most often:

1. No strict isolation between IT office networks and OT production networks, allowing lateral malware spread;
2. Uncontrolled dumb terminals (IP cameras, industrial controllers) with default weak passwords and unregulated private network access;
3. Incomplete log storage or no link between online behaviour and real-name user accounts.

Q: Carriers have already delivered the broadband network; what extra work do factories need to pass joint inspections?
A: Optical modems only provide basic connectivity; they cannot generate real-name registration records or full internet behaviour logs. On top of the carrier’s broadband access, factories must add three core capabilities: IT/OT hard isolation, dumb terminal access control, and full-cycle log auditing.

Q: Can remote detection under Order No.176 expose IT/OT isolation loopholes?
A: Yes. Article 4 of the Order permits public security authorities to conduct remote vulnerability scanning and penetration testing with 3 working days’ prior notice. Inspectors can remotely verify whether office segments can reach production control networks, check weak passwords on IoT terminals, and test log retrievability. Temporary configuration changes made right before inspection will be easily detected.