What is the primary objective of **COPPA**?

**The primary objective of COPPA is to protect the online privacy of children under 13 by requiring verifiable parental consent before operators collect their personal information.** Enacted in 1998 and effective April 21, 2000, COPPA mandates that operators of commercial websites, online services, mobile apps, and IoT devices directed to children—or with actual knowledge of collecting data from them—post privacy policies, limit data collection to necessities, ensure data security, and grant parents access, review, and deletion rights (16 CFR Part 312).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **COPPA**?

**Operators of commercial websites, online services, mobile apps, and IoT devices that are directed to children under 13 or have actual knowledge of collecting personal information from them must comply with COPPA.** This includes entities collecting or benefiting from such data (e.g., ad networks), with extraterritorial application to services processing U.S. children's data; non-profits are exempt if not commercial.

Does **COPPA** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**COPPA does not mandate external audits or third-party certification for all operators but permits participation in FTC-approved safe harbor programs.** These self-regulatory programs, such as iKeepSafe (approved 2014) or ESRB (modified 2018), involve FTC-audited compliance; operators must otherwise demonstrate adherence through internal policies, data practices, and verifiable parental consent mechanisms.

How often should an assessment for **COPPA** be performed?

**COPPA does not prescribe a fixed frequency for assessments, but operators should conduct regular internal reviews aligned with data practices and FTC enforcement trends.** Best practices include ongoing monitoring of audience analytics for "actual knowledge," policy updates per Federal Register notices (e.g., 2019 reviews), and assessments before launching features involving persistent identifiers or geolocation to maintain compliance.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **COPPA**?

**Non-compliance with COPPA results in civil penalties up to $43,792 per violation, enforced by the FTC as unfair or deceptive practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act.** State AGs may also sue; precedents include YouTube's $170 million fine (2019) for unconsented tracking on child-directed content, with additional risks of injunctions, data deletion orders, and reputational harm.

Can **COPPA** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, COPPA's requirements for parental consent, data minimization, and child privacy can be mapped to elements in other international frameworks, though it remains a standalone U.S. law.** Its strict under-13 threshold and verifiable consent mechanisms align with aspects of global child data protections, providing a baseline for operators navigating multi-jurisdictional compliance.

What is the first step to begin implementing **COPPA**?

**The first step to implement COPPA is to conduct an audience analysis to determine if your service is directed to children under 13 or risks actual knowledge of their data collection.** Assess content appeal (e.g., cartoons, games), implement age-screening mechanisms, and draft a comprehensive privacy policy disclosing data practices before proceeding to verifiable parental consent and data security measures.

What is the primary objective of **APRA CPS 234**?

**APRA CPS 234 requires regulated entities to maintain an information security capability commensurate with vulnerabilities and threats to information assets.** Effective from 1 July 2019, it aims to minimise the likelihood and impact of information security incidents—including cyber-attacks—on the confidentiality, integrity, or availability (**CIA**) of information assets, explicitly including those managed by related parties or third parties (paragraphs 1, 15–16).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **APRA CPS 234**?

**APRA CPS 234 applies to all APRA-regulated entities, including authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs), general insurers, life companies, private health insurers, and RSE licensees.** It covers authorised non-operating holding companies (**NOHCs**), group Heads (applied group-wide, including non-regulated entities), and Australian operations of foreign ADIs, Category C insurers, and eligible foreign life insurance companies (**EFLICs**) (paragraphs 2–4).

Does **APRA CPS 234** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**APRA CPS 234 does not mandate external audits or third-party certifications.** It requires internal audit to review the design and operating effectiveness of information security controls, including those of related parties and third parties, by appropriately skilled personnel; internal audit must assess third-party assurance if relying on it for material-impact assets (paragraphs 32–34).

How often should an assessment for **APRA CPS 234** be performed?

**APRA CPS 234 requires the testing program to be reviewed at least annually or upon material changes to information assets or the business environment.** Systematic testing of control effectiveness must occur with frequency commensurate with vulnerability/threat change rates, asset criticality/sensitivity, incident consequences, untrusted environment exposure, and asset changes (paragraphs 27, 31).

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **APRA CPS 234**?

**Non-compliance with APRA CPS 234 exposes entities to APRA's prudential enforcement powers, including directions, remediation orders, and heightened supervision.** APRA may adjust or exclude requirements in writing; failure risks operational disruption, loss of licence confidence, and liability tied to impacts on depositors, policyholders, or customers (paragraphs 9, 11).

Can **APRA CPS 234** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, APRA CPS 234's outcomes-based requirements for commensurate capability, controls, testing, and assurance align with frameworks like ISO 27001 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework.** Entities commonly map CPS 234 governance, asset classification, and third-party obligations to these for operationalisation, while retaining Board accountability and APRA notification timelines (paragraphs 13, 35–36).

What is the first step to begin implementing **APRA CPS 234**?

**The first step is for the Board to assume ultimate responsibility and define information security roles and responsibilities across the entity.** This establishes governance under paragraph 13, enabling subsequent steps like asset classification (paragraph 20), policy framework development (paragraphs 18–19), and capability assessment (paragraph 15).

COPPA vs APRA CPS 234

Standards Comparison

COPPA

Mandatory

1998

U.S. regulation requiring parental consent for children's online data

APRA CPS 234

Mandatory

2019

Australian prudential standard for information security resilience

Quick Verdict

COPPA protects children under 13 from online data collection via parental consent for global operators, while APRA CPS 234 mandates information security governance and testing for Australian financial entities. Organizations adopt COPPA for child privacy compliance, CPS 234 for prudential cyber resilience.

Children Privacy

COPPA

Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

6-12 months

Key Features

Mandates verifiable parental consent before child data collection
Targets child-directed websites, apps, and IoT operators
Expansive personal info includes persistent IDs, geolocation
Provides parental access, review, deletion rights
FTC enforces with $43,792 per-violation penalties

Information Security

APRA CPS 234

APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 Information Security

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Board ultimate responsibility for information security
72-hour APRA notification for material incidents
Third-party asset management and control evaluation
Risk-based asset classification by criticality/sensitivity
Systematic independent testing and internal audit assurance

Detailed Analysis

A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

COPPA Details

What It Is

Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) is a U.S. federal regulation enacted in 1998 and effective 2000, enforced by the FTC. It safeguards children under 13 from unauthorized personal data collection by commercial websites, apps, and services directed at kids or with actual knowledge of users' age. Core approach mandates verifiable parental consent (VPC), data minimization, and security.

Key Components

VPC mechanisms: credit card, video calls, 11+ methods on sliding scale.
Broad **personal informationnames, device IDs, geolocation, audio/video files.
Privacy notices, parental review/deletion rights, data retention limits.
Safe harbor self-regulatory programs (e.g., ESRB, iKeepSafe). Rule-based under 16 CFR Part 312, no fixed control count.

Why Organizations Use It

Ensures legal compliance amid FTC enforcement ($43,792/violation, e.g., YouTube $170M fine). Mitigates risks from edtech/AI tracking, builds parental trust, enables global U.S. kid data handling. Strategic for gaming, apps, adtech.

Implementation Overview

Assess child-directed status, post policies, deploy age gates/VPC, secure data. Applies to commercial operators worldwide. No certification; relies on self-audits, FTC oversight. Suits all sizes, highest burden for small/child-focused firms. (178 words)

APRA CPS 234 Details

What It Is

APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 (Information Security) is a binding regulation issued by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. Effective from 1 July 2019, it mandates APRA-regulated entities like banks, insurers, and superannuation funds to maintain information security capabilities commensurate with threats and vulnerabilities. Its risk-based approach emphasizes governance, controls, testing, and rapid incident notification to protect confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of information assets, including those managed by third parties.

Key Components

Board accountability and defined roles/responsibilities
Information asset classification by criticality/sensitivity
Commensurate controls across asset lifecycle
Systematic testing, internal audit assurance, and annual response plan testing
72-hour APRA notification for material incidents; 10 business days for unremediable weaknesses Built on prudential principles; no fixed control count, but assurance-driven compliance model without formal certification.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory compliance to avoid penalties, enforcement, and supervisory actions
Enhances cyber resilience, operational continuity, and stakeholder protection
Manages third-party risks in complex ecosystems
Builds trust with customers, regulators, and partners

Implementation Overview

Phased approach: gap analysis, policy frameworks, asset inventories, control implementation, testing programs. Applies to all sizes of APRA entities in Australia; requires ongoing evidence-based assurance via internal audits.

Key Differences

Aspect	COPPA	APRA CPS 234
Scope	Children's online privacy and data collection	Information security and cyber resilience
Industry	Online services, apps worldwide targeting US kids	Australian financial institutions (banks, insurers)
Nature	Mandatory US federal law enforced by FTC	Mandatory prudential standard enforced by APRA
Testing	Compliance audits via safe harbors	Systematic independent control testing annually
Penalties	$43,792 per violation, FTC fines	Supervisory actions, remediation directions

Scope

COPPA

Children's online privacy and data collection

APRA CPS 234

Information security and cyber resilience

Industry

COPPA

Online services, apps worldwide targeting US kids

APRA CPS 234

Australian financial institutions (banks, insurers)

Nature

COPPA

Mandatory US federal law enforced by FTC

APRA CPS 234

Mandatory prudential standard enforced by APRA

Testing

COPPA

Compliance audits via safe harbors

APRA CPS 234

Systematic independent control testing annually

Penalties

COPPA

$43,792 per violation, FTC fines

APRA CPS 234

Supervisory actions, remediation directions

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about COPPA and APRA CPS 234

COPPA FAQ

APRA CPS 234 FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

The Panoramic View: How Integrated Compliance Monitoring Creates Unprecedented Organizational Visibility and Adaptability

Gain unprecedented organizational visibility with integrated compliance monitoring. Automate real-time alerts, ensure GDPR & SOC 2 adherence, reduce risks, and

SOC 2 Audit Survival Guide: Auditor Questions, Red Flags, and Evidence Prep for First-Time Pass

Ace your SOC 2 audit with predicted auditor questions, model answers, red flags, and evidence checklists from CPA best practices & SignWell's journey. Reduce st

Singapore PDPA Implementation Guide: Mastering Part 6A Breach Notification Thresholds and Timelines from Primary Statute

Master Singapore PDPA Part 6A breach notifications: statutory thresholds (risk of significant harm), 72-hour timelines, checklists, templates & frameworks. Comp

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.

100+ Standards & Regulations

AI-Powered Insights

Collaborative Assessments

Actionable Recommendations

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

WELL vs LEED

Compare WELL vs LEED: WELL prioritizes human health via onsite testing; LEED targets sustainability through documentation. Unlock the ideal certification for your project.

NIST CSF vs GDPR UK

Compare NIST CSF vs UK GDPR: Align cyber risk management with data protection principles. Uncover key differences, overlaps & strategies for compliance success.

WCAG vs MAS TRM

Compare WCAG 2.2 accessibility vs MAS TRM tech risk guidelines. Key differences, compliance strategies & implementation for finance pros. Achieve resilient digital ops now!

COPPA

APRA CPS 234

Quick Verdict

COPPA

Key Features

APRA CPS 234

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

COPPA Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

APRA CPS 234 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

COPPA FAQ

What is the primary objective of COPPA?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with COPPA?

Does COPPA require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for COPPA be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with COPPA?

Can COPPA be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing COPPA?

APRA CPS 234 FAQ

What is the primary objective of APRA CPS 234?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with APRA CPS 234?

Does APRA CPS 234 require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for APRA CPS 234 be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with APRA CPS 234?

Can APRA CPS 234 be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing APRA CPS 234?

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

The Panoramic View: How Integrated Compliance Monitoring Creates Unprecedented Organizational Visibility and Adaptability

SOC 2 Audit Survival Guide: Auditor Questions, Red Flags, and Evidence Prep for First-Time Pass

Singapore PDPA Implementation Guide: Mastering Part 6A Breach Notification Thresholds and Timelines from Primary Statute

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

WELL vs LEED

NIST CSF vs GDPR UK

WCAG vs MAS TRM