What is the primary objective of **ISO 19600**?

**ISO 19600 provides guidelines for establishing, developing, implementing, evaluating, maintaining, and improving a Compliance Management System (CMS).** Published in 2014 as a Type B guidance standard, it promotes principles of good governance, proportionality, transparency, and sustainability across all organization sizes and sectors. The framework follows a 10-clause Annex SL structure with Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) logic, enabling risk-based integration into existing management processes for systematic compliance with obligations.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **ISO 19600**?

**No organization is legally required to comply with ISO 19600, as it is non-mandatory Type B guidance.** It applies voluntarily to all organization types—public, private, non-profit, SMEs, or multinationals—facing statutory, regulatory, contractual, or internal obligations. Stakeholders like CCOs, boards, and risk officers in sectors such as financial services, manufacturing, healthcare, and technology use it to benchmark CMS effectiveness for regulators, customers, and partners.

Does **ISO 19600** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**ISO 19600 does not require external audits or third-party certification.** As guidance rather than a certifiable Type A standard, organizations self-assess alignment via internal audits (per ISO 19011), management reviews, and performance evaluations. It supports voluntary benchmarking to demonstrate CMS maturity without formal accreditation.

How often should an assessment for **ISO 19600** be performed?

**ISO 19600 assessments should occur at planned intervals, with continual monitoring, periodic internal audits, and management reviews.** Risk reassessments are triggered by changes in obligations, context, incidents, or issues (Clause 4.6). Typical cadence includes quarterly management reviews, annual audits, and ongoing monitoring of Key Compliance Indicators (KCIs) like audit findings and incident trends.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **ISO 19600**?

**There are no direct consequences for non-compliance with ISO 19600 itself, as it imposes no mandatory requirements.** Indirectly, lacking a structured CMS increases exposure to regulatory fines, operational disruptions, reputational damage, and higher insurance costs from unaddressed compliance obligations, as illustrated by cases like €12M fines for inadequate anti-bribery controls.

An **ISO 19600** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, ISO 19600 can be mapped to other international frameworks due to its Annex SL structure and PDCA alignment.** It integrates with existing systems like quality or environmental management via shared clauses on context, leadership, planning, support, operation, evaluation, and improvement, reducing duplication while preserving compliance independence.

What is the first step to begin implementing **ISO 19600**?

**The first step is securing top-management commitment and establishing a Compliance Steering Committee (Clause 5).** Define CMS scope (Clause 4), appoint a CCO-equivalent with direct governing body access, independence, and resources, and produce a signed commitment charter to drive cross-functional governance.

What is the primary objective of **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**The primary objective of MLPS 2.0 is to establish a graded cybersecurity protection system ensuring security controls match the potential harm from system compromise to national security, social order, and public interests.** It classifies systems into five levels (1-5) based on impact severity, mandating technical, management, physical, and personnel controls via standards like GB/T 22239-2019, with common baselines for all levels and extensions for cloud, IoT, and big data.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**All network operators in mainland China must comply with MLPS 2.0 under Article 21 of the 2017 Cybersecurity Law.** This includes domestic enterprises, foreign-invested firms, cloud providers, and operators of IT, OT, IoT, or big data systems; critical sectors like finance and energy often grade at Level 3+.

Does **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 requires external security reviews by licensed Chinese firms for Level 2+ systems, scoring at least 75/100 for certification.** Operators file with local PSBs for approval; Level 3+ needs detailed documentation like architecture diagrams and policies.

How often should an assessment for **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** be performed?

**Assessments under MLPS 2.0 must occur periodically: biennially for Level 2, annually for Level 3, semi-annually for Level 4, and as mandated for Level 5.** Re-evaluations are also required after major changes like cloud migrations.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**Non-compliance with MLPS 2.0 risks fines up to 100,000 yuan, operational suspensions, system shutdowns, and intensified PSB inspections.** Enforcement ties to license renewals; severe cases involve blacklisting or criminal liability.

An **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 control domains align with frameworks like ISO 27001's Annex A and NIST CSF categories.** Organizations map governance, technical, and risk controls via Statements of Applicability, adapting for MLPS-specific grading and enforcement.

What is the first step to begin implementing **MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)**?

**The first step is conducting a provisional self-assessment to classify systems into Levels 1-5 based on impact to national security and public interests.** Inventory assets, document rationale, and prepare for Level 2+ expert review and PSB filing within 30 days.

ISO 19600 vs MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Standards Comparison

ISO 19600

Voluntary

2014

International guidelines for compliance management systems

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Mandatory

N/A

China's mandatory framework for graded network protection

Quick Verdict

ISO 19600 offers voluntary, risk-based CMS guidelines for global compliance benchmarking, while MLPS 2.0 mandates graded cybersecurity protections for China networks with enforced audits. Companies adopt ISO 19600 for strategic agility; MLPS 2.0 to avoid fines and ensure legal operations.

Compliance Management

ISO 19600

ISO 19600:2014 Compliance management systems — Guidelines

Cost

€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

6-12 months

Key Features

Risk-based guidelines for Compliance Management Systems
Non-certifiable Type B guidance standard
Emphasizes good governance principles
Follows Annex SL high-level structure
Scalable across all organization sizes

Standard

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Multi-Level Protection Scheme 2.0

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Five-level impact-based system classification
Mandatory PSB registration for Level 2+ systems
Graded technical and governance controls
Third-party audits scoring 75/100 minimum
Ongoing re-evaluations by law enforcement

Detailed Analysis

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

ISO 19600 Details

What It Is

ISO 19600:2014 is a Type B guidance standard from the International Organization for Standardization providing recommendations for establishing, implementing, evaluating, maintaining, and improving a Compliance Management System (CMS). It adopts a risk-based approach applicable to all organization sizes, sectors, and geographies, following the Annex SL structure with 10 clauses mirroring PDCA cycles.

Key Components

Core principles: good governance, proportionality, transparency, sustainability.
Main pillars: context analysis, leadership commitment, planning (obligations/risks), support, operation, performance evaluation, improvement.
No fixed controls; flexible benchmarking framework.
Non-certifiable; predecessor to ISO 37301.

Why Organizations Use It

Mitigates regulatory penalties, operational disruptions, reputational damage.
Enhances decision-making, efficiency (10-20% cost savings), market access.
Builds integrity culture, future-proofs for certification.
Voluntary adoption demonstrates strategic compliance to stakeholders.

Implementation Overview

Phased: leadership commitment, gap analysis, design/documentation, rollout, continuous improvement.
Scalable for SMEs to multinationals; integrates with ISO 9001/14001.
No formal certification; internal audits and self-assessments suffice.

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) Details

What It Is

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) is China's legally mandated cybersecurity regulation under the 2016 Cybersecurity Law. It requires network operators to classify systems into five protection levels based on potential harm to national security, social order, and public interests, implementing graded technical, governance, and physical controls.

Key Components

Core domains: physical security, network protection, data security, access control, monitoring, and governance.
Standards like GB/T 22239-2019 define baselines; extended for cloud, IoT, big data.
**Compliance modelself-classification, third-party audits (75/100 score for Level 2+), PSB approval.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for China operations to avoid fines, suspensions.
Enhances resilience, supports market access, aligns with data laws.
Builds regulator trust, reduces breach risks.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping, classification, gap analysis, remediation, audits.
Applies to all network operators in China; intensive for Level 3+.
Requires local experts, ongoing re-evaluations.

Key Differences

Aspect	ISO 19600	MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)
Scope	Compliance management systems, risk-based CMS guidelines	Graded cybersecurity for networks, technical/management controls
Industry	All sectors globally, scalable for SMEs to enterprises	All network operators in China, critical infrastructure focus
Nature	Voluntary Type B guidelines, non-certifiable benchmarking	Mandatory under Cybersecurity Law, enforced by PSBs
Testing	Internal audits, self-assessments, management reviews	Third-party evaluations Level 2+, PSB approval, periodic re-evals
Penalties	No legal penalties, internal governance risks only	Fines, operational suspension, inspections by authorities