What is the primary objective of **SOC 2**?

**The primary objective of SOC 2 is to provide independent attestation that a service organization's controls meet the Trust Services Criteria (TSC) for security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy.** Developed by the AICPA, SOC 2 evaluates systems handling customer data, with Security (CC1-CC9) as the mandatory common criteria. Type 2 reports assess design and operating effectiveness over 3-12 months, delivering assurance to stakeholders via CPA audits.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **SOC 2**?

**No organization is legally required to comply with SOC 2, as it is a voluntary AICPA framework, but service organizations like SaaS, cloud, and data processors face professional mandates from enterprise clients.** It targets providers storing, processing, or transmitting customer data, where buyers in RFPs and MSAs demand Type 2 reports for vendor risk assessments, disqualifying non-compliant vendors.

Does **SOC 2** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, SOC 2 requires an external audit by an independent AICPA-accredited CPA firm to issue Type 1 or Type 2 attestation reports.** Type 1 verifies control design at a point in time; Type 2 tests operating effectiveness over a period via sampling, walkthroughs, and evidence review, resulting in an auditor's opinion on control sufficiency.

How often should an assessment for **SOC 2** be performed?

**SOC 2 Type 2 assessments should be performed annually to capture a full monitoring period and maintain trust.** Bridge letters from management extend validity up to 3 months between audits, confirming no material changes, with recertification involving 9 prior + 3 new months of bridged monitoring.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **SOC 2**?

**Non-compliance with client-mandated SOC 2 results in deal disqualification, extended sales cycles, and heightened breach liability, though AICPA imposes no direct fines.** Enterprises reject vendors lacking Type 2 reports, inflating CAC by 20-50%, triggering custom audits, indemnity clauses, or lost revenue in 70-80% of SaaS deals.

Can **SOC 2** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, SOC 2 controls map extensively to frameworks like ISO 27001 (80% overlap), NIST CSF, and others via AICPA spreadsheets.** Common Criteria (CC1-CC9) align with ISO Annex A controls, enabling reuse for multi-compliance without dual certifications, particularly for Security TSC.

What is the first step to begin implementing **SOC 2**?

**The first step to implement SOC 2 is a scoping exercise and gap analysis against the Trust Services Criteria, engaging a CPA for readiness assessment.** Define in-scope systems, data flows, and TSC (Security mandatory), inventory assets, and map ~50-100 controls, prioritizing quick wins like policies and IAM.

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

**The primary objective of MLPS 2.0 is to classify information systems into five protection levels based on potential harm to national security, social order, and public interests, ensuring commensurate technical, management, and governance controls.** Originating from China's 2017 Cybersecurity Law Article 21, it mandates graded protection for all network operators via standards like GB/T 22239-2019, covering cloud, IoT, big data, and industrial systems to prevent disruptions and breaches.

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

**All network operators in mainland China, including domestic firms, foreign-invested enterprises, and multinationals with local systems, must comply with MLPS 2.0.** This encompasses operators of IT networks, cloud services, IoT, big data platforms, and critical infrastructure in sectors like finance, energy, and telecom, enforced by Ministry of Public Security and local PSBs.

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 and above systems, with PSB approval and scoring of at least 75/100 needed for certification.** Level 1 relies on self-assessment; higher levels demand documentation review, testing, and on-site inspections, with periodic re-evaluations (biennial for Level 2, annual for Level 3).

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

**Assessments under MLPS 2.0 must occur periodically based on level: biennially for Level 2, annually for Level 3, semi-annually for Level 4, and as mandated for Level 5, plus after major changes.** Self-inspections are required continuously; external third-party evaluations and PSB reviews ensure ongoing compliance.

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

**Non-compliance with MLPS 2.0 results in administrative fines up to 100,000 RMB, operational suspensions, business license denial, and intensified PSB inspections.** Severe cases link to broader sanctions under Cybersecurity Law, including system shutdowns, as seen in enforcement with thousands of investigations since 2019.

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

**Yes, MLPS 2.0 control domains—physical, network, data, operations, governance—map to frameworks like ISO 27001 Annex A and NIST CSF categories.** Organizations leverage existing ISMS for gap analysis, though MLPS adds prescriptive grading, PSB oversight, and data localization not in voluntary standards.

SOC 2 vs MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Standards Comparison

SOC 2

Voluntary

2010

AICPA framework for service organization security controls

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)

Mandatory

N/A

China's mandatory graded cybersecurity protection scheme.

Quick Verdict

SOC 2 offers voluntary trust assurance for global SaaS via AICPA audits, accelerating enterprise sales. MLPS 2.0 mandates graded cybersecurity for China networks under PSB oversight, ensuring legal compliance amid enforcement risks.

Cybersecurity / Trust

SOC 2

System and Organization Controls 2

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

6-12 months

Key Features

Type 2 audits prove operating effectiveness over 3-12 months
Mandatory Security TSC with four flexible optional criteria
Independent CPA attestation builds enterprise stakeholder trust
Risk-based controls tailored for service organizations
Automation-friendly evidence for scalable multi-framework overlap

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 classification and PSB registration
Graded technical/governance controls by level
Third-party audits and law enforcement oversight
Extensions for cloud, IoT, ICS, big data

Detailed Analysis

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

SOC 2 Details

What It Is

SOC 2 (System and Organization Controls 2) is a voluntary framework from the AICPA for auditing service organizations' controls. It uses Trust Services Criteria (TSC)—Security (mandatory, CC1-CC9), plus optional Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, Privacy. Adopts a risk-based approach with Type 1 (design) and Type 2 (operating effectiveness) reports.

Key Components

Five TSC domains with ~50-100 mapped controls
Common Criteria (CC series) underpin Security
COSO-based principles for governance and monitoring
CPA-issued attestation reports, Type 2 annual standard

Why Organizations Use It

Accelerates sales by streamlining vendor due diligence
Market-driven for SaaS/cloud, not legally required
Reduces breach risks via robust IAM, logging, incident response
Competitive moat, overlaps 80% with ISO 27001/HIPAA
Builds investor/customer trust and resilience

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping/gap analysis, control deployment, 3-12 month monitoring, CPA audit
Targets data-handling service orgs (startups to enterprises)
Automation tools (Vanta, Drata) collect evidence; scalable globally

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme) Details

What It Is

MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme 2.0) is China's legally mandated cybersecurity framework under the 2016 Cybersecurity Law. It requires network operators to classify systems into five impact-based protection levels (1-5), implementing graded technical, governance, and organizational controls to safeguard national security, social order, and public interests.

Key Components

Core domains: physical security, network protection, data security, access control, monitoring, governance.
Standards like GB/T 22239-2019, GB/T 25070-2019 define baselines and extensions for cloud, IoT, ICS, big data.
Common controls for all levels plus level-specific requirements; compliance via third-party audits (75/100 score minimum) and PSB approval for Level 2+.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for China operations to avoid fines, suspensions, inspections.
Enhances resilience, aligns with data laws; builds regulator trust, enables market access.

Implementation Overview

Phased: classify, gap analysis, remediate, audit, ongoing re-evaluations.
Applies to all network operators in China; higher costs/audits for Level 3+; integrates with ISO 27001/NIST.

Key Differences

Aspect	SOC 2	MLPS 2.0 (Multi-Level Protection Scheme)
Scope	Trust Services Criteria: security, availability, confidentiality, privacy, processing integrity	Graded protection levels for networks: physical, network, host, data, operations, governance
Industry	SaaS, cloud, tech service providers globally	All network operators in China, critical infrastructure focus
Nature	Voluntary AICPA audit standard	Mandatory under Cybersecurity Law, PSB enforced
Testing	Type 1/2 CPA audits, annual recertification	Third-party evaluations Level 2+, PSB approval, periodic re-evals
Penalties	No legal penalties, market/business consequences	Fines, operations suspension, license revocation