APRA CPS 234
Australian prudential standard for financial information security resilience
MAS TRM
Singapore guidelines for financial technology risk management
Quick Verdict
APRA CPS 234 mandates information security for Australian financial firms with strict notifications, while MAS TRM provides comprehensive technology risk guidelines for Singapore FIs emphasizing proportionality. Organizations adopt them for regulatory compliance, cyber resilience, and operational stability.
APRA CPS 234
APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 Information Security
Key Features
- Board ultimate responsibility for information security
- 72-hour APRA notification for material incidents
- Covers third-party managed information assets
- Systematic risk-based testing and assurance
- Asset classification by criticality and sensitivity
MAS TRM
Technology Risk Management Guidelines (January 2021)
Key Features
- Board and senior management accountability
- Proportional implementation by risk profile
- End-to-end technology risk lifecycle framework
- Third-party services risk management
- Defence-in-depth cyber resilience controls
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
APRA CPS 234 Details
What It Is
APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 (Information Security) is a binding prudential regulation for APRA-regulated financial entities in Australia. Effective from 1 July 2019, it mandates maintaining information security capabilities commensurate with threats to ensure resilience against incidents impacting confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets, including those managed by third parties. It adopts a risk-based, assurance-driven approach focused on governance, controls, and testing.
Key Components
- **Governance and accountabilityBoard ultimate responsibility, defined roles.
- **Risk managementAsset classification by criticality/sensitivity, commensurate controls.
- **Incident responseDetection mechanisms, response plans, annual testing.
- **AssuranceSystematic testing, internal audit of controls including third-party.
- **Reporting72-hour notification for material incidents, 10-day for weaknesses. No fixed control count; principles-based with PPG 234 guidance.
Why Organizations Use It
Mandatory for ADIs, insurers, super funds to meet legal obligations, mitigate cyber risks, protect stakeholders, and avoid APRA enforcement. Enhances operational resilience, third-party oversight, and board-level assurance for trust and stability.
Implementation Overview
Phased: gap analysis, policy framework, asset inventory, controls, testing program. Applies to all sizes of APRA entities/groups; requires ongoing internal audit, no external certification but APRA supervision.
MAS TRM Details
What It Is
MAS Technology Risk Management (TRM) Guidelines (revised January 2021) are supervisory guidance issued by Singapore's Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) for financial institutions. They provide a principles-based framework focused on managing technology and cyber risks to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of systems and data. The risk-proportional approach emphasizes governance, controls, and continuous improvement.
Key Components
- 15 main sections covering governance, risk frameworks, secure development, IT service management, resilience, access controls, cryptography, data security, cyber operations, assessments, and audit.
- Synthesised into 12 core principles like board accountability, asset classification, third-party oversight, and defence-in-depth.
- No fixed controls; outcomes-based with independent assurance.
Why Organizations Use It
- Regulatory compliance for MAS-supervised FIs to avoid enforcement.
- Enhances cyber resilience, reduces incidents, builds stakeholder trust.
- Supports digital transformation with secure engineering and third-party management.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: governance setup, asset inventory, risk assessment, control deployment, testing.
- Applies to all MAS FIs, scaled by size/complexity; no formal certification but supervisory review.
Key Differences
| Aspect | APRA CPS 234 | MAS TRM |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Information security governance and cyber resilience | Broad technology risk management including cyber and IT operations |
| Industry | Australian financial institutions (ADIs, insurers, super) | Singapore financial institutions (banks, insurers, payments) |
| Nature | Mandatory prudential standard with enforcement powers | Supervisory guidelines considered in supervision |
| Testing | Systematic testing and internal audit assurance annually | Annual PT for internet-facing systems, regular VA |
| Penalties | Supervisory actions, directions, penalties for breaches | Fines, license conditions, enforcement via supervision |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about APRA CPS 234 and MAS TRM
APRA CPS 234 FAQ
MAS TRM FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

NIST CSF 2.0: Key Enhancements and How They Address Evolving Cyber Threats
Explore NIST CSF 2.0 updates: Govern function, supply chain security, SME playbooks for ransomware & AI threats. Boost your cyber defenses now!

CMMC Level 3 Implementation Guide: Integrating NIST SP 800-172 Enhanced Controls for APT Defense
Step-by-step CMMC Level 3 guide for DIB contractors. Implement 24 NIST SP 800-172 controls on Level 2. Prep for DIBCAC, C3PAO scoping & 180-day POA&Ms. Boost cy

Top 10 Cost-Saving Hacks for CMMC Compliance: Budgeting Blueprints for Small DIB Suppliers
Slash CMMC costs 30-50% with top 10 hacks for small DIB suppliers. Enclave scoping, FedRAMP clouds, automation, POA&M tips & budgeting blueprints for Level 2 co
Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM
Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform
Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
HITRUST CSF vs REACH
Compare HITRUST CSF vs REACH: Unpack certifiable security framework vs EU chemical regs. Tailored controls, maturity scoring & risk mgmt for compliance pros. Boost assurance now!
FISMA vs BREEAM
Compare FISMA vs BREEAM: FISMA drives federal cybersecurity with NIST RMF & risk mgmt; BREEAM certifies sustainable buildings via credits & ratings. Master compliance for security & green excellence—read now!
Six Sigma vs COBIT
Discover Six Sigma vs COBIT: DMAIC-driven excellence meets IT governance mastery. Compare methodologies, benefits & implementation for optimal strategy. Choose wisely now!