FDA 21 CFR Part 11
FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records and signatures
APRA CPS 234
Australian prudential standard for information security resilience
Quick Verdict
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 ensures electronic records/signatures trust for US life sciences, while APRA CPS 234 mandates cyber resilience for Australian finance. Pharma adopts Part 11 for FDA compliance; banks use CPS 234 to meet prudential oversight and avoid penalties.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11
21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures
Key Features
- Establishes equivalence of electronic records to paper
- Mandates secure, time-stamped audit trails
- Requires unique, non-repudiable electronic signatures
- Enforces closed/open system access controls
- Demands risk-based system validation
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
- Third-party asset management requirements
- Systematic independent control testing program
- Asset classification by criticality and sensitivity
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details
What It Is
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is a U.S. regulation establishing criteria for electronic records and electronic signatures to be trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It applies to FDA-regulated industries using electronic systems for predicate-rule records. The risk-based approach narrows scope to relied-upon electronic records, with enforcement discretion on some elements like validation.
Key Components
- **Subpart AScope, definitions (closed/open systems).
- **Subpart BControls for records (audit trails, access, validation; §11.10/11.30).
- **Subpart CSignature requirements (uniqueness, linking, multi-component; §§11.50-11.300). Core principles include data integrity (ALCOA+), non-repudiation. No formal certification; compliance via inspection.
Why Organizations Use It
Ensures regulatory acceptance of digital records, mitigates enforcement risks (warnings, holds), supports data integrity for quality decisions. Benefits: efficiency, inspection readiness, stakeholder trust in pharma/biotech/devices.
Implementation Overview
Risk-based CSV (GAMP5): scope records, validate systems (IQ/OQ/PQ), implement controls, train users. Applies to life sciences; phased (6-24 months), ongoing via change control, audits.
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 for regulated financial entities. Effective from 1 July 2019, it mandates maintaining information security capabilities commensurate with threats to ensure resilience against incidents impacting confidentiality, integrity, or availability (CIA) of information assets, including those managed by third parties.
Key Components
- **Governance and accountabilityBoard ultimate responsibility, defined roles.
- **Risk managementAsset classification by criticality/sensitivity, commensurate controls.
- **Testing and assuranceSystematic testing, internal audit reviews.
- **Incident response72-hour APRA notification for material incidents, annual plan testing. Built on risk-based, assurance-driven principles; no fixed control count, focuses on outcomes.
Why Organizations Use It
Mandatory for APRA-regulated entities (banks, insurers, super funds); reduces cyber risks, ensures operational continuity, builds stakeholder trust. Enhances prudential compliance, avoids penalties, strengthens third-party oversight.
Implementation Overview
Phased approach: gap analysis, policy framework, asset inventory, controls/testing, third-party assessments. Applies to all sizes in Australian financial sector; requires ongoing assurance, no formal certification but APRA supervision.
Key Differences
| Aspect | FDA 21 CFR Part 11 | APRA CPS 234 |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Electronic records/signatures equivalence to paper | Information security capability and cyber resilience |
| Industry | US life sciences, pharma, medical devices | Australian financial services (banks, insurers) |
| Nature | Mandatory US FDA regulation with enforcement discretion | Mandatory prudential standard with strict notifications |
| Testing | Risk-based system validation, audit trails | Systematic independent control testing annually |
| Penalties | Warning letters, product holds, enforcement actions | Supervisory directions, penalties, license restrictions |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and APRA CPS 234
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ
APRA CPS 234 FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Beyond the Boardroom: 5 Ways Modern Compliance Software Elevates Every Department
Discover 5 ways modern compliance software boosts HR, IT, finance & more: automate risks, enhance efficiency, ensure data integrity, stay audit-ready. Elevate y

Why applying the NIST CSF Standard is a Life-Saver!
Discover why NIST CSF 2.0 is a life-saver for organizations. This flexible framework's 6 functions—Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover—boost res

You Guide on how to Start Implementing NIST CSF in Your Organization
Master NIST CSF implementation in your organization with this detailed guide. Learn core functions, key steps, best practices, and tips for cybersecurity succes
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
ISO 27001 vs SOX
ISO 27001 vs SOX: Compare global ISMS standard with U.S. financial compliance framework. Key differences, overlaps, implementation tips for resilience & risk reduction—expert guide!
PCI DSS vs CSL (Cyber Security Law of China)
PCI DSS vs CSL (Cyber Security Law of China): Compare key requirements, compliance strategies, data rules & penalties. Secure payments & China ops—expert insights now!
PCI DSS vs AEO
Discover critical PCI DSS vs AEO differences: PCI secures payments with 12 controls, AEO boosts supply chain trust via customs compliance. Optimize risks now!