You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

January 13, 2021

IT Risks in Insurance: Thailand’s Regulator Sets Criteria for Monitoring and Managing

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Office of the Insurance Commission (OIC) recently issued two notifications—one for life-insurance companies and another for insurance companies—establishing key criteria and requirements for insurance companies to manage risks relating to IT and cybersecurity.

The notifications, entitled Notifications Re: Criteria for the Supervision and Management of Risks Relating to Information Technology for Life/Non-life Insurance Companies B.E. 2563 (2020) came into effect on January 1, 2021, and cover eight major aspects of IT risk management as detailed below.

IT Governance

Insurance companies are required to monitor and manage IT risks and cyber threats in accordance with the size, characteristics, complexity, and context of their business operations, and each company should have at least one director with knowledge of, or past experience in, the field of information technology.

IT Project Management

Insurance companies are required to develop a written framework for IT project management, covering at least the commencement, implementation, and control of the project, as well as the project closing and post-project auditing. Companies must also appoint a committee for supervising and monitoring IT projects.

IT Security

Insurance companies are required to institute a written IT security policy, which must be reviewed at least once a year or upon implementing any significant changes. The policy must be approved by the board of directors, or a relevant subcommittee appointed by the board of directors.

In outsourcing IT activities to third-party service providers, or entering into any arrangement that allows business partners to connect to or access the company’s IT system, insurance companies are required to specify their own criteria and procedures for the selection of third-party service providers, enter into a written service agreement and a service level agreement with the third-party provider, and conform with other requirements under the notifications. Insurance companies will also be required to comply with the OIC’s forthcoming guidelines on the criteria for the supervision of IT outsourcing to third-party service providers.

IT Risk Management

Insurance companies must also write an IT risk management policy and review it at least once a year, or upon implementing any significant changes. This policy must also be approved by the board of directors or their appointed subcommittee. The companies must also have procedures for IT risk assessment, treatment, monitoring, and reviews.

IT Compliance

Insurance companies are required to implement the required measures for IT compliance to conform with applicable laws and regulations concerning IT and anti-money laundering.

IT Audit

Insurance companies are required to have at least one internal or external IT auditor with experience and expertise in IT auditing. Companies are also required to establish a plan and scope for IT audits, which must be approved by the audit committee and reviewed at least once a year, or upon implementing any significant changes. The IT audit reports must be approved by the audit committee and kept at the company office.

Cybersecurity

Insurance companies are required to establish a framework and guidelines for supervision of and protection against cyber threats, in accordance with cybersecurity laws and commensurate with the size and complexity of their business operations. They must also implement required measures against cyber threats, including risk identification, protection, detection, and countermeasures.

Reporting Obligations

Insurance companies are obligated to report cyber threat incidents to the OIC, and other threats that affect their IT systems, in the following cases:

  • They become aware of any material issue or incident regarding the use of IT that affects the company’s services, systems, reputation, or the data of insured parties. These incidents include cases where a company’s material IT is subject to an actual cyberattack, or there is a potential threat of a cyberattack, that must be reported to the company’s chief executive officer. In this circumstance, the companies are required to report the incident to the OIC, along with other required details, immediately upon becoming aware of it.
  • They are subject to an attack from any cyber threat causing issues or incidents relating to the provision of critical IT infrastructure. These incidents must be reported to the OIC, or the  responsible cybersecurity authority as required under the law, without delay and within 72  hours.

For more information on the requirements under these notifications, or on any aspect of insurance law in Thailand, please contact the Tilleke & Gibbins insurance team at [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

Insurance

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 11, 2026
On July 27, 2026, the State Bank of Vietnam (SBV) released a draft decree proposing amendments to Decree No. 52/2024/ND-CP dated May 15, 2024, on non-cash payments (Decree 52). The draft decree would amend 17 of Decree 52’s 38 articles, with several key changes directly affecting providers of intermediary payment service (IPS). The key proposed changes affecting IPS providers are outlined below. Streamlining IPS Licensing Procedures A central objective of the draft decree is to simplify regulatory procedures for IPS providers. Notably, it would significantly reduce IPS licensing documentation requirements by removing the need to submit enterprise registration certificates, investment registration certificates, and documents evidencing the qualifications of the legal representative and general director. Instead, the SBV would retrieve this information directly from national business registration and other specialized databases, requesting additional documents only where the relevant information cannot be verified electronically or is incomplete. The draft decree also removes the current limit of two rounds for dossier supplementation and shortens processing timelines for several IPS licensing procedures such as issuance, amendment, and reissuance of IPS licenses. The processing time for new IPS license applications would be thereby reduced from 90 to 60 working days. In addition, several continuing IPS business conditions would be removed. For example, IPS providers would no longer be required to maintain certain representations relating to corporate restructuring or the legality of contributed capital. Likewise, the IPS project plan (đề án) would become a one-time application document rather than an ongoing licensing condition. If retained in the final decree, this change could provide IPS providers with significantly greater flexibility to implement post-licensing technology upgrades, system integrations, and corporate restructuring transactions without needing to revisit the originally approved project plan. The draft decree also removes the requirement for the SBV to consult the Ministry of Public
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand has finalized its social media KYC (“know your customer”) rules under Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers (No. 2), which was published in the Government Gazette on May 5, 2026, and will take effect on November 1, 2026. While an early draft of the notification proposed requiring social media platforms to arrange identification of every user account, the final notification is significantly more targeted, focusing on paid online advertising and advertiser identity verification. Though the regulatory initiative primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes, it also has important consequences for intellectual property enforcement, because the verified platform records that will be generated under the new requirements can help IP rights holders to identify anonymous online infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The notification requires social media service providers to verify the identity of advertisers before their paid advertisements are published and disseminated in Thailand through social media, regardless of whether the advertising fees come from the advertisers or third parties. Verification of an advertiser is valid for one year, after which verification would have to be performed again before the platform could publish additional paid advertisements from the advertiser. Permitted verification methods are specified under the notification. A platform may verify an advertiser by checking identity evidence and confirming the connection between the advertiser and that identity evidence, with the notification giving facial comparison against certain government-issued identity documents as an example. Alternatively, platforms may verify advertisers through a digital identity verification and authentication system with an identity-proofing assurance level not lower than the level prescribed by Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Commission. The notification further requires platforms to retain only the advertiser’s information necessary to identify the advertiser, beginning from the start of the advertising activity and for
Read More
August 10, 2026
On July 31, 2026, Thailand’s Big Data Institute (BDI) launched a public consultation on the principles of a proposed new data-sharing law, with comments accepted until August 31, 2026. If enacted, the law would establish Thailand’s first comprehensive framework for government and private-sector data sharing, creating a systematic, secure, and transparent regime to support analytics, policymaking, research, and innovation. Central Data-Sharing Platform The draft law establishes a central system for data sharing, managed by the BDI. Government agencies would be required to connect to the BDI’s Data Integration and Intelligence Platform (also referred to as D2), in accordance with the BDI’s rules and procedures. Five Dimensions of Data Sharing The draft law covers five key types of data sharing between government (G), businesses (B), and consumers (C): G2B: Private organizations may request government data specifically for research and development purposes. The BDI will assess the applicant’s data governance, security, and privacy capabilities whether such measures meet prescribed standards before forwarding the request to the relevant government agency within 90 days. Any dispute may be escalated to a newly established Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for final determination. G2G: Government agencies may request data from other agencies through the central system. The data-holding agency must respond within 90 days, taking legality, necessity, proportionality, public interest, and personal data protection into account. Disputes may be referred to the Data-Sharing Promotion Committee for adjudication. B2G: In emergency situations involving public safety, economic security, or disaster response, the Minister of Digital Economy and Society may require private entities to provide data through the central data-sharing system. Government agencies must specify the data requested, demonstrate its necessity and expected benefits, and request only data reasonably available to the data holder. Requests for personal data must be limited to the minimum amount necessary. B2C: Royal decrees may
Read More
August 10, 2026
Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) recently released draft guidance on records of processing activities (ROPA) for personal data controllers and processors under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The draft guidance, which was presented to the public on July 7, 2026, addresses both controller records of collection, use, and disclosure of personal data and processor records of processing activities carried out on behalf of controllers. If implemented, the guidance will significantly expand organizational expectations for ROPA preparation, maintenance, and use across all sectors. Key Takeaways The draft guidance contains several important implications for organizations subject to the PDPA: ROPA reframed as a core accountability tool. The guidance elevates ROPA from an administrative record to a central accountability mechanism, connecting controller duties with recordkeeping obligations. ROPA as a source for privacy notices and governance documents. ROPA should serve as the primary source for privacy notices and align with consent management, retention schedules, DPIAs, incident response plans, and vendor contracts. Expanded scope across all activities. ROPA must cover all processing activities across the organization—including security, finance, HR, and external contractors—with correct controller or processor classification for each. Ongoing maintenance and auditability. ROPA must be updated for any change to systems, purposes, or processors, reviewed at least annually, and maintained with version control and a designated owner. Enhanced vendor, processor, and cross-border transfer requirements. Organizations must document all processors, external recipients, and cross-border transfers, specifying purposes, access scope, and destination countries. Linkage with risk assessment, DPIAs, and LIAs. ROPA should assign risk levels to each activity and identify when data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) or legitimate interests assessments (LIAs) are required, functioning as a risk-management tool. ROPA and data breach readiness. Incomplete ROPA can delay breach response and notification. Organizations should map data flows, vendors,
Read More