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

**The primary objective of **LGPD** (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais, Law No. 13.709/2018) is to protect the fundamental rights of freedom and privacy of natural persons by regulating personal data processing.** Enacted August 14, 2018, with full sanctions from August 1, 2021, it mandates 10 core principles (Art. 6), including purpose limitation, necessity, transparency, security, prevention, non-discrimination, and accountability, applying to controllers and processors handling data of Brazilian residents.

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

**All controllers and processors handling personal data of individuals located in Brazil must comply with **LGPD**, regardless of company size or location.** Its extraterritorial scope (Art. 3) covers any processing in Brazil, targeting Brazilian residents for goods/services, or data collected there, including B2B/employee data; exemptions (Art. 4) are limited to non-economic private uses, journalism, and public security.

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

****LGPD** does not mandate external audits or third-party certification.** The **Autoridade Nacional de Proteção de Dados (ANPD)** conducts audits (Arts. 55-56), while controllers must maintain Records of Processing Activities (Art. 37), appoint a DPO (Art. 41, potentially universal for controllers), and perform DPIAs for high-risk processing (Art. 38); voluntary certifications like ISO 27701 enhance maturity.

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

****LGPD** requires ongoing assessments, with Records of Processing Activities updated continuously and DPIAs conducted for high-risk activities like legitimate interests processing.** ANPD guidance (e.g., CD/ANPD No. 02/2022) mandates simplified records for small entities; practical best practices include quarterly internal audits, annual full reviews, and ad-hoc updates for new processing or incidents.

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

**Non-compliance with **LGPD** incurs graduated ANPD sanctions, including fines up to 2% of Brazilian revenue (capped at R$50 million per infraction), data processing suspension up to 6 months, and publicity of violations.** Factors considered (Art. 53) include gravity, cooperation, and safeguards; additional civil liabilities arise under Art. 42 for damages.

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

**Yes, **LGPD** can be mapped to other international frameworks due to shared principles like purpose limitation, minimization, and data subject rights.** Its 10 principles and 10 legal bases (Art. 7) align closely with GDPR (e.g., rights under Art. 18), enabling hybrid programs; ANPD-approved SCCs (Resolution CD/ANPD No. 19/2024) facilitate transfers by August 23, 2025.

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

**The first step to implement **LGPD** is appointing a Data Protection Officer (DPO) and conducting a comprehensive data mapping to create a Record of Processing Activities (RoPA).** Per Arts. 37 and 41, this inventories flows, purposes, legal bases, and risks, enabling governance setup, DPIA identification, and principle compliance (Art. 6).

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.** This minimises the likelihood and impact of incidents on confidentiality, integrity, or availability (**CIA**) of information assets, including those managed by related parties or third parties (paragraphs 15–16). Effective from 1 July 2019, it ensures continued sound operation of the entity.

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 (paragraph 2).** For Heads of groups, it extends group-wide, including non-regulated entities (paragraph 4). Foreign ADIs, Category C insurers, and eligible foreign life insurance companies comply for Australian branch operations (paragraph 3). Transitional provisions apply third-party assets from the earlier of contract renewal or 1 July 2020 (paragraph 6).

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

**APRA CPS 234 does not mandate external audits or third-party certifications but requires internal audit to review design and operating effectiveness of information security controls (paragraph 32).** Internal audit must assess third-party assurance if relying on it for material-impact assets (paragraph 34). Systematic testing must use appropriately skilled, functionally independent specialists (paragraph 30), which may involve external providers.

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 (paragraph 31).** Testing frequency must be commensurate with vulnerability/threat change rates, asset criticality/sensitivity, incident consequences, untrusted environment exposure, and asset changes (paragraph 27). Incident response plans must be reviewed and tested annually (paragraph 26).

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

**Non-compliance with APRA CPS 234 exposes entities to APRA's prudential powers, including directions, penalties, and heightened supervision under enabling Acts.** Entities must notify APRA within **72 hours** of material incidents (paragraph 35) or **10 business days** of material control weaknesses not remediable timely (paragraph 36). APRA may adjust requirements in writing (paragraph 11), with risks to operational soundness and stakeholder interests.

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

**Yes, APRA CPS 234's outcomes-based requirements for governance, controls, testing, and third-party oversight align with frameworks like ISO 27001 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework.** It emphasises commensurate capability (paragraph 15), asset classification (paragraph 20), systematic testing (paragraph 27), and Board accountability (paragraph 13), enabling mapping without prescription. Entities commonly use these for operationalisation while meeting CPS 234's prudential focus.

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 (paragraphs 13–14).** This establishes governance, followed by classifying information assets by criticality and sensitivity (paragraph 20) to drive commensurate controls, policy framework, and capability (paragraphs 15, 18–21).

LGPD vs APRA CPS 234

Standards Comparison

LGPD

Mandatory

2020

Brazil's comprehensive regulation for personal data protection

APRA CPS 234

Mandatory

2019

Australian prudential standard for information security resilience

Quick Verdict

LGPD mandates data protection for Brazilian residents across sectors, enforcing rights and transfers with fines up to 2% revenue. APRA CPS 234 requires financial firms to maintain cyber resilience via controls, testing, and 72-hour notifications. Companies comply for legal obligations and resilience.

Data Privacy

LGPD

Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais (Law 13.709/2018)

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Extraterritorial scope targeting Brazilian residents worldwide
10 core principles including prevention and non-discrimination
Fines up to 2% Brazilian revenue capped at R$50M
Mandatory DPO appointment for controllers with disclosure
3-business-day breach notifications to ANPD and subjects

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
Extends to third-party managed information assets
Systematic independent control testing required
Internal audit assurance including third-parties

Detailed Analysis

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

LGPD Details

What It Is

Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais (LGPD), Law No. 13.709/2018, is Brazil's comprehensive data protection regulation. It governs processing of personal data of natural persons, with extraterritorial scope applying to any targeting Brazilian residents. Primary purpose: safeguard privacy rights via risk-based accountability, mirroring GDPR but with Brazilian adaptations like 10 principles.

Key Components

**10 core principlespurpose limitation, necessity, transparency, security, prevention, accountability.
**Data subject rightsaccess, correction, deletion, portability, anonymization, objection to automated decisions.
**Legal bases10 options including consent, legitimate interests, credit protection.
**Governancemandatory DPO for controllers, RoPAs, DPIAs for high-risk, enforced by ANPD with graduated sanctions.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for entities processing Brazilian data, avoiding fines up to 2% Brazilian revenue (R$50M cap). Drives risk reduction, builds trust, enables market access in Brazil's digital economy, supports innovation via anonymization exemptions.

Implementation Overview

**Phased risk-based approachgovernance, data mapping, policies, controls, DSRs, monitoring. Applies to all sizes/industries globally if in scope; no certification but ANPD audits/sanctions.

APRA CPS 234 Details

What It Is

APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 (Information Security) is a mandatory Australian regulation for APRA-regulated financial entities. It requires maintaining information security capabilities commensurate with threats and vulnerabilities to minimize incident impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) of information assets. The risk-based approach emphasizes board governance, controls, testing, and rapid APRA notifications.

Key Components

Board ultimate responsibility (para 13)
Asset classification by criticality/sensitivity (para 20)
Lifecycle controls for all assets, including third-party managed (paras 21-22)
Systematic testing and independent assurance (paras 27-34)
72-hour material incident notification; 10-business-day control weakness reporting (paras 35-36) Built on prudential resilience principles, applies group-wide.

Why Organizations Use It

Legal compliance to avoid penalties/enforcement
Enhances cyber resilience and operational continuity
Manages third-party/supply-chain risks
Builds customer/stakeholder trust
Aligns with CPS 220/230 for integrated risk management

Implementation Overview

Phased: gap analysis, policy framework, asset inventory, controls/testing, incident plans. Targets banks, insurers, superannuation; ongoing APRA supervision, no certification but internal audit required. (178 words)

Key Differences

Aspect	LGPD	APRA CPS 234
Scope	Personal data processing, rights, transfers	Information security, cyber resilience, controls
Industry	All sectors, Brazil residents, extraterritorial	Financial services, APRA-regulated entities, Australia
Nature	Mandatory data protection law, ANPD enforcement	Mandatory prudential standard, APRA supervision
Testing	DPIAs for high-risk, records on demand	Systematic control testing, annual reviews, independent audit
Penalties	2% Brazilian revenue, max R$50M per infraction	Supervisory actions, remediation, no fixed fines

Scope

LGPD

Personal data processing, rights, transfers

APRA CPS 234

Information security, cyber resilience, controls

Industry

LGPD

All sectors, Brazil residents, extraterritorial

APRA CPS 234

Financial services, APRA-regulated entities, Australia

Nature

LGPD

Mandatory data protection law, ANPD enforcement

APRA CPS 234

Mandatory prudential standard, APRA supervision

Testing

LGPD

DPIAs for high-risk, records on demand

APRA CPS 234

Systematic control testing, annual reviews, independent audit

Penalties

LGPD

2% Brazilian revenue, max R$50M per infraction

APRA CPS 234

Supervisory actions, remediation, no fixed fines

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about LGPD and APRA CPS 234

LGPD FAQ

APRA CPS 234 FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Thailand PDPA Implementation Guide: Subordinate Regulations for 72-Hour Breach Reporting and Cross-Border Transfers (2022-2024 Rules)

Step-by-step Thailand PDPA guide: 72-hour breach notifications, cross-border transfers (2022-2024 rules). Risk checklists, GDPR templates avoid THB 5M fines. Mu

Image this: What if GDPR would have NOT been implemented by the EU

What if the EU never implemented GDPR? Explore this hypothetical: consumer data protection in Dec 2025, key differences, pros/cons for users & companies. Read t

What if the EU would not have made GDPR mandatory...

Explore a world without mandatory GDPR: How would organizations manage data? What data privacy regs would emerge? Uncover impacts on businesses and privacy laws

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

WCAG vs WELL

Discover WCAG vs WELL: Web accessibility standard (POUR, AA conformance) meets building health cert (Air, Light, Mind). Compare for compliance wins. Dive in now!

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs EMAS

Discover FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs EMAS: Compare US electronic records compliance with EU environmental management. Optimize strategies for global life sciences. Expert insights await!

AS9100 vs ISO 27018

Compare AS9100 vs ISO 27018: Aerospace QMS (ISO 9001+) for safety/risk vs cloud PII privacy code (ISO 27001+). Key diffs, overlaps, implementation. Optimize compliance now!

LGPD

APRA CPS 234

Quick Verdict

LGPD

Key Features

APRA CPS 234

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

LGPD 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

LGPD FAQ

What is the primary objective of LGPD?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with LGPD?

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

How often should an assessment for LGPD be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with LGPD?

Can LGPD be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing LGPD?

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...

Thailand PDPA Implementation Guide: Subordinate Regulations for 72-Hour Breach Reporting and Cross-Border Transfers (2022-2024 Rules)

Image this: What if GDPR would have NOT been implemented by the EU

What if the EU would not have made GDPR mandatory...

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

WCAG vs WELL

FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs EMAS

AS9100 vs ISO 27018