On September 11, 2025, the Cyberspace Administration of China (“CAC”) issued the Administrative Measures for Reporting National Cybersecurity Incidents (“AMRNCI”). The AMRNCI provide guidance on how to report cybersecurity incidents, including the relevant governmental authorities to notify, the timing and contents of such notifications, the channel to submit such notifications, and how to assess the “grade” of an incident. An unofficial translation of the AMRNCI may be found here.
Definition of a “Cybersecurity Incident”
A “cybersecurity incident” is defined as an event that causes harm to networks and information systems, or to the data and business applications within such networks and systems, that has negative impacts on the Chinese State, society or economy. Such incidents may result from human behavior, network attacks, network vulnerabilities, software and hardware defects and malfunctions, force majeure or other factors.
Jurisdiction and Reporting Obligations
In the event of a cybersecurity incident, a network operator providing services in China must report the incident to the relevant competent authority.
If a cybersecurity incident occurs outside of China and the affected data is transferred from China, the Chinese entity that transferred the affected data must report such incident to the relevant competent authority.
Cybersecurity Incident Notification Procedures and Timing Requirements
The appropriate incident reporting procedures and timing requirements depend on the type of network operator and level of incident. For a description of the different incident levels, please see the “Annex” to the unofficial translation of the AMRNCI, available here. The table below sets forth the relevant incident reporting procedures and timing requirements based on the type of network operator and incident level:
Type of network operator |
Significant or general level incident |
Particularly major or major level incident |
Critical information infrastructure (“CII”) operators |
Report to the competent data protection authority (DPA) and the competent public security organ(s) promptly and within one hour of becoming aware of or discovering the incident. |
The competent DPA shall report to the CAC and the public security organ of the State Council immediately and no later than 30 minutes after receiving the report. |
Network operators affiliated with central and state organs (and their directly subordinate units) (e.g. State-owned entities) |
Report to the cyberspace administration of their respective organs promptly and no later than two hours after becoming aware of or discovering the incident. |
The relevant cyberspace administration department shall report to the CAC immediately and no later than one hour after receiving the report. |
Other network operators |
Report to the local cyberspace administration authority at the provincial level promptly and no later than four hours after becoming aware of or discovering the incident. |
The local cyberspace administration authority at the provincial level shall report to the CAC immediately and no later than one hour after receiving the report, and shall simultaneously notify relevant departments at the same level. |
Where a network operator is part of an industry that is subject to specific reporting regulations, such network operator also must report the incident to the competent industrial regulatory authorities.
Where the cybersecurity incident involves criminal or illegal activities, the network operator must also promptly report the incident to the public security authorities.
Contents of Notification
The regulator notification must include the following:
- name of the affected entity and basic information about the affected system or facility;
- time, location, type and severity level of the cybersecurity incident, along with its impact and harm, and remedial measures taken and their effectiveness (for ransomware attacks, reporting should also include the ransom amount demanded, payment method and date of payment);
- development of the situation and further potential impacts and harms;
- preliminary analysis of the cause of the cybersecurity incident;
- initial investigation results, including but not limited to potential attacker information, attack paths, and existing vulnerabilities;
- proposed further remedial measures and whether the entity coordinated with governmental authorities;
- status of on-site preservation of evidence related to the cybersecurity incident; and
- other relevant details about the incident.
If a network operator cannot provide all of the above-listed details within the required timeline, the first two items may be provided first, with supplementary details promptly provided as the information becomes available.
If new significant developments arise with respect to the incident or related investigation, the network operator must promptly supplement its notification.
Summary Reporting
Within 30 days after the conclusion of a cybersecurity incident, a network operator must conduct a comprehensive analysis and create a summary that includes the cause of the incident, remedial measures implemented, harms caused by the incident, identity of the threat actor, corrective actions taken and lessons learned. The summary report must be submitted through the original reporting channel.
Reporting Channel
The CAC provides 6 channels for reporting cybersecurity incidents:
- the cybersecurity incident reporting hotline, “12387”;
- the official cybersecurity incident reporting website, at cert.org.cn;
- the “12387” mini-program on WeChat;
- the “National Internet Emergency Center CNCERT” WeChat official account (click “Report Incident”);
- email 12387@cert.org.cn; and
- fax to 010-82992387.
Penalties for Failure
The relevant authorities may impose penalties on a network operator that fails to report an incident in accordance with the AMRNCI’s requirements. Furthermore, if any delayed, omitted, false, or concealed reporting of a cybersecurity incident results in significant harm, the network operator and relevant responsible personnel may be subject to heavier penalties.
Minimizing or Waiving Liability
If a network operator can demonstrate it implemented reasonable and necessary information security safeguards, followed its incident response plan, reduced the impact and harm caused by an incident, and notified the relevant authorities in accordance with the AMRNCI, the network operator and responsible personnel may be exempted from penalties or subject to lighter penalties.
Search
Recent Posts
Categories
- Behavioral Advertising
- Centre for Information Policy Leadership
- Children’s Privacy
- Cyber Insurance
- Cybersecurity
- Enforcement
- European Union
- Events
- FCRA
- Financial Privacy
- General
- Health Privacy
- Identity Theft
- Information Security
- International
- Marketing
- Multimedia Resources
- Online Privacy
- Security Breach
- U.S. Federal Law
- U.S. State Law
- Workplace Privacy
Tags
- Aaron Simpson
- Accountability
- Adequacy
- Advertisement
- Advertising
- Age Appropriate Design Code
- Age Verification
- American Privacy Rights Act
- Anna Pateraki
- Anonymization
- Anti-terrorism
- APEC
- Apple Inc.
- Argentina
- Arkansas
- Article 29 Working Party
- Artificial Intelligence
- Audit
- Australia
- Austria
- Automated Decisionmaking
- Baltimore
- Bankruptcy
- Belgium
- Biden Administration
- Big Data
- Binding Corporate Rules
- Biometric Data
- Blockchain
- Bojana Bellamy
- Brazil
- Brexit
- British Columbia
- Brittany Bacon
- Brussels
- Business Associate Agreement
- BYOD
- California
- CAN-SPAM
- Canada
- Cayman Islands
- CCPA
- CCTV
- Chile
- China
- Chinese Taipei
- Christopher Graham
- CIPA
- Class Action
- Clinical Trial
- Cloud
- Cloud Computing
- CNIL
- Colombia
- Colorado
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Compliance
- Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Congress
- Connecticut
- Consent
- Consent Order
- Consumer Protection
- Consumer Rights
- Cookies
- COPPA
- Coronavirus/COVID-19
- Council of Europe
- Council of the European Union
- Court of Justice of the European Union
- CPPA
- CPRA
- Credit Monitoring
- Credit Report
- Criminal Law
- Critical Infrastructure
- Croatia
- Cross-Border Data Flow
- Cross-Border Data Transfer
- Cyber Attack
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- Data Breach
- Data Brokers
- Data Controller
- Data Localization
- Data Privacy Framework
- Data Processor
- Data Protection Act
- Data Protection Authority
- Data Protection Impact Assessment
- Data Protection Officer
- Data Security
- Data Transfer
- David Dumont
- David Vladeck
- Deceptive Trade Practices
- Delaware
- Denmark
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Defense
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Justice
- Department of the Treasury
- Design
- Digital Markets Act
- District of Columbia
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- Dobbs
- Dodd-Frank Act
- DORA
- DPIA
- E-Privacy
- E-Privacy Directive
- Ecuador
- Ed Tech
- Edith Ramirez
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act
- Electronic Privacy Information Center
- Electronic Protected Health Information
- Elizabeth Denham
- Employee Monitoring
- Encryption
- ENISA
- EU Data Protection Directive
- EU Member States
- European Commission
- European Data Protection Board
- European Data Protection Supervisor
- European Parliament
- Facial Recognition Technology
- FACTA
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Federal Communications Commission
- Federal Data Protection Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- FERC
- Financial Data
- FinTech
- Florida
- Food and Drug Administration
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
- France
- Franchise
- Fred Cate
- Freedom of Information Act
- Freedom of Speech
- Fundamental Rights
- GDPR
- Geofencing
- Geolocation
- Geolocation Data
- Georgia
- Germany
- Global Privacy Assembly
- Global Privacy Enforcement Network
- Gramm Leach Bliley Act
- Hacker
- Hawaii
- Health Data
- HIPAA
- HITECH Act
- Hong Kong
- House of Representatives
- Hungary
- Illinois
- India
- Indiana
- Indonesia
- Information Commissioners Office
- Information Sharing
- Insurance Provider
- Internal Revenue Service
- International Association of Privacy Professionals
- International Commissioners Office
- Internet
- Internet of Things
- Iowa
- IP Address
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Jacob Kohnstamm
- Japan
- Jason Beach
- Jay Rockefeller
- Jenna Rode
- Jennifer Stoddart
- Jersey
- Jessica Rich
- John Delionado
- John Edwards
- Kentucky
- Korea
- Large Language Model
- Latin America
- Laura Leonard
- Law Enforcement
- Lawrence Strickling
- Legislation
- Liability
- Lisa Sotto
- Litigation
- Location-Based Services
- London
- Louisiana
- Madrid Resolution
- Maine
- Malaysia
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Meta
- Mexico
- Michigan
- Microsoft
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Mobile
- Mobile App
- Mobile Device
- Montana
- Morocco
- MySpace
- Natascha Gerlach
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Science and Technology Council
- National Security
- National Security Agency
- National Telecommunications and Information Administration
- Nebraska
- NEDPA
- Netherlands
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New Zealand
- Nigeria
- Ninth Circuit
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- North Korea
- Norway
- Obama Administration
- OCPA
- OECD
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Foreign Assets Control
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Online Behavioral Advertising
- Online Privacy
- Opt-In Consent
- Oregon
- Outsourcing
- Pakistan
- Parental Consent
- Payment Card
- PCI DSS
- Penalty
- Pennsylvania
- Personal Data
- Personal Health Information
- Personal Information
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Peru
- Philippines
- Poland
- PRISM
- Privacy By Design
- Privacy Notice
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Rights
- Privacy Rule
- Privacy Shield
- Profiling
- Protected Health Information
- Ransomware
- Record Retention
- Red Flags Rule
- Rhode Island
- Richard Thomas
- Right to Be Forgotten
- Right to Privacy
- Risk Assessment
- Risk-Based Approach
- Rosemary Jay
- Russia
- Safe Harbor
- Salesforce
- Sanctions
- Schrems
- Scott Kimpel
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Security Rule
- Senate
- Sensitive Data
- Serbia
- Service Provider
- Singapore
- Smart Grid
- Smart Metering
- Social Media
- Social Security Number
- South Africa
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- South Korea
- Spain
- Spyware
- Standard Contractual Clauses
- State Attorneys General
- States Attorney General
- Steven Haas
- Stick With Security Series
- Stored Communications Act
- Student Data
- Supreme Court
- Surveillance
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Targeted Advertising
- Telecommunications
- Telemarketing
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- Tennessee
- Terry McAuliffe
- Texas
- Text Message
- Thailand
- Transparency
- Transportation Security Administration
- Trump Administration
- United Arab Emirates
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Unmanned Aircraft Systems
- Uruguay
- Utah
- Vermont
- Video Privacy Protection Act
- Video Surveillance
- Virginia
- Viviane Reding
- Washington
- Whistleblowing
- Wireless Network
- Wiretap
- ZIP Code