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 information systems into five levels (1-5) based on impact severity, mandating commensurate technical, management, physical, and personnel controls per GB/T 22239-2020 standards. This integrates cybersecurity into national governance, with common baselines for all systems and extensions for cloud, IoT, big data, and industrial controls.

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 entities, cloud providers, and operators of IT, OT, IoT, or big data systems. Critical sectors like finance, energy, telecom classify at Level 3+, with PSBs enforcing via inspections and license ties; virtually no exemptions apply.

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

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 requires external audits by licensed Chinese firms for Level 2+ systems, scoring at least 75/100 for certification.** Operators submit results to PSBs for approval; Level 3+ demands annual reviews per GB/T 28448-2019, including technical testing, documentation, and on-site inspections.

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

**Assessments under MLPS 2.0 must occur biennially for Level 2, annually for Level 3, semi-annually for Level 4, and as mandated for Level 5.** Re-evaluations are triggered by major changes (e.g., cloud migration); self-inspections are continuous for all levels.

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 suspension, license revocation, and intensified PSB inspections.** Enforcement since 2019 includes business shutdowns for unfiled Level 2+ systems and sanctions for incidents tied to inadequate controls.

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

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 control domains (e.g., governance, physical, technical) map to ISO 27001 Annex A and NIST CSF categories.** Organizations leverage existing ISMS Statements of Applicability for gap analysis, though MLPS adds prescriptive grading, PSB oversight, and data localization absent in those frameworks.

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

**The first step is conducting a provisional self-classification of systems into Levels 1-5 based on impact to national security and public interests.** Inventory assets, assess harm severity per GB/T 22240-2020, document rationale, then file with PSBs within 30 days for Level 2+.

What is the primary objective of **SAMA CSF**?

**SAMA CSF's primary objective is to create a common cybersecurity approach across SAMA-regulated financial institutions, achieve appropriate maturity levels, and ensure proper management of cybersecurity risks.** Version 1.0 (May 2017) prescribes principles, objectives, and control considerations across four domains—Cyber Security Leadership and Governance, Risk Management and Compliance, Operations and Technology, and Third Party Cyber Security—using a six-level maturity model targeting at least Level 3 (Structured and Formalized).

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **SAMA CSF**?

**SAMA CSF is mandatory for all SAMA-regulated entities, including banks, insurance and reinsurance companies, financing companies, credit bureaus, and financial market infrastructure providers operating in Saudi Arabia.** It applies to all information assets (electronic, physical, applications, infrastructure); third-party providers must enable client compliance via contracts. Boards, senior management, CISOs, CROs, IT leaders, and compliance officers bear direct accountability.

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

**SAMA CSF requires periodic self-assessments using SAMA-provided questionnaires and internal audits, but does not mandate external third-party certification.** SAMA conducts supervisory reviews and audits; internal audits must follow accepted standards. Evidence portfolios (policies, risk registers, logs) support maturity demonstrations at Level 3+.

How often should an assessment for **SAMA CSF** be performed?

**SAMA CSF assessments must be performed periodically, including annual reviews of critical assets and ongoing monitoring via KPIs/KRIs.** Self-assessments occur via SAMA questionnaires for maturity benchmarking (Levels 0-5); penetration tests target customer/internet-facing services annually. Continuous improvement at Level 5 integrates real-time metrics and peer comparisons.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **SAMA CSF**?

**Non-compliance with SAMA CSF triggers regulatory enforcement, including supervisory actions, remediation demands, heightened scrutiny, audit findings, and potential operational restrictions.** As a mandated framework, violations fall under SAMA's broader supervisory powers; weak controls elevate incident risks, financial losses, reputational damage, and systemic threats without specified fines in the CSF.

Can **SAMA CSF** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, SAMA CSF conceptually aligns with international frameworks like NIST CSF, ISO 27001, PCI-DSS, and BASEL, enabling control mappings for integrated compliance.** Its principle-based structure and maturity model support leveraging existing implementations, though SAMA adds sector-specific mandates (e.g., payment systems, e-banking MFA).

What is the first step to begin implementing **SAMA CSF**?

**The first step for SAMA CSF implementation is securing Board and senior management sponsorship, followed by a control-level gap analysis and initial maturity assessment against the framework's domains.** Form a program team, inventory assets/obligations, and produce a baseline (targeting Level 3 minimum) via the maturity model.

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) vs SAMA CSF

Standards Comparison

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Mandatory

N/A

China's mandatory graded cybersecurity protection regime

SAMA CSF

Mandatory

2017

Saudi framework for financial cybersecurity compliance

Quick Verdict

MLPS 2.0 mandates graded protection for all China networks via PSB enforcement, while SAMA CSF requires maturity-based controls for Saudi finance. Companies adopt MLPS for China operations compliance; SAMA for regulatory resilience.

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 impact-based protection levels for systems
Mandatory PSB registration and audits Level 2+
Law enforcement oversight by Public Security Bureaus
Extended controls for cloud, IoT, big data
Governance, technical, personnel requirements integration

Cybersecurity

SAMA CSF

SAMA Cyber Security Framework Version 1.0

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

6-12 months

Key Features

Six-level maturity model with Level 3 baseline
Four core domains covering governance to third-party
Board and CISO governance requirements
Risk-based principle-oriented controls
Financial sector-specific payment security mandates

Detailed Analysis

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

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) Details

What It Is

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme 2.0) is China's mandatory cybersecurity regulation under the 2017 Cybersecurity Law (Article 21). It is a graded protection framework classifying information systems into five levels based on compromise impact to national security, social order, and public interests. Scope covers all network operators in mainland China, including cloud, IoT, big data, and ICS.

Key Components

Core domains: physical security, network protection, data security, operations monitoring, governance.
Standards: GB/T 22239-2019 (baseline), GB/T 25070-2019 (technical), GB/T 28448-2019 (evaluation).
Common controls plus level-specific extensions; enforced via PSB oversight and third-party audits (75/100 pass score).

Why Organizations Use It

Legal compliance avoids fines, suspensions; enhances resilience; required for licenses. Reduces breach risks, builds regulator trust; strategic for China market access.

Implementation Overview

Phased: classify systems, gap analysis, remediate controls, external audits, PSB filing. Applies to all sizes in China; Level 2+ needs recurring evaluations. (178 words)

SAMA CSF Details

What It Is

The Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority Cyber Security Framework (SAMA CSF), Version 1.0 (May 2017), is a mandatory regulatory framework for SAMA-regulated financial institutions in Saudi Arabia. It provides a principle-based, outcome-oriented approach to cybersecurity, focusing on governance, risk management, and maturity to protect information assets against threats ensuring confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Key Components

Four main **domainsCyber Security Leadership & Governance, Risk Management & Compliance, Operations & Technology, Third-Party Cyber Security.
Numerous subdomains with principles, objectives, and control considerations (over 100 subcontrols).
Six-level maturity model (0-5), targeting at least Level 3 (structured/formalized).
Aligned with NIST CSF, ISO 27001, PCI-DSS; compliance via self-assessment and SAMA audits.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for banks, insurers, financing firms to avoid penalties, audits, fines.
Enhances resilience, reduces incidents, supports Vision 2030 digital growth.
Builds trust, enables partnerships, optimizes efficiency via standardized controls.

Implementation Overview

Phased: gap analysis, risk assessment, control deployment, monitoring.
Targets financial sector in Saudi Arabia; scalable by size.
Requires board sponsorship, CISO, evidence for periodic self-assessments/SAMA reviews. (178 words)