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

August 6, 2025

Thailand Releases Draft Guidelines on Government Cloud Adoption and Data Classification

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Digital Government Development Agency (DGA) has released drafts of two pivotal documents to guide Thai government agencies in adopting cloud technology and classifying data for cloud usage. These draft guidelines, open for public hearing through August 12, 2025, are part of the national “Go Cloud First” policy, which aims to accelerate digital transformation, improve efficiency, and ensure robust data security across the public sector. The new standards will have significant implications for both government agencies and cloud service providers operating in Thailand.

Highlights of the draft guidelines are presented below.

Government Cloud Usage Guidelines

  • Cloud-first transformation: All government agencies are directed to prioritize cloud solutions for new IT projects, in line with the cabinet’s “Go Cloud First” policy.
  • Cloud model selection: Agencies must assess their needs and select the most appropriate cloud deployment model—public, private, hybrid, or community cloud—based on the sensitivity of the data and operational requirements.
  • Service types: The guidelines provide criteria for choosing between Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS), emphasizing the importance of using standard, non-customized services where possible.
  • Cost management: Agencies are required to plan and separate cloud-related expenses, ensuring transparency and efficient budget allocation.
  • Cloud migration: The guidelines outline the steps for migrating to the cloud and highlight the role of cloud service providers in facilitating the process, including supporting innovation and enabling smooth exit strategies.
  • Procurement compliance: All cloud procurement must comply with public sector procurement laws and regulations. Only providers meeting government-mandated standards can be selected.
  • Security and shared responsibility: The guidelines clarify the division of security responsibilities between cloud providers and government agencies. While providers manage infrastructure security, agencies remain responsible for data, application, and access controls.
  • Legal framework: Agencies must comply with the Digital Government Administration Act, Cybersecurity Act, Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), and other relevant laws.

Cloud Data Classification Guidelines

  • Three-tier data classification: Government data is classified into three categories:
    1. Official data: Low-sensitivity data, suitable for public cloud storage.
    2. Protected data: Data that could cause harm if disclosed (e.g., tax, medical, or financial records), recommended to be stored in domestic public clouds with enhanced security.
    3. Highly protected data: Critical or top-secret data (e.g., national security information), must be stored in sovereign or state-controlled clouds within Thailand, with the highest security measures.
  • Data sovereignty and localization: The guidelines stress that all government data is recommended to be stored within Thailand to ensure compliance with local laws and maintain data sovereignty. Exceptions require DGA approval, except for highly protected data. The guidelines also distinguish between data at rest and data in transit or processing. While the focus of localization is on data at rest, data in transit (e.g., during transmission) or temporary processing outside Thailand could be permitted under certain technical and legal safeguards, provided no unauthorized access occurs. A localization exemption could be granted with special approval from the DGA.
  • Cross-border data transfers: Storing data outside Thailand is generally prohibited for sensitive information, with limited exceptions subject to DGA approval. The guidelines define “data that should be in Thailand” as data at rest (i.e., data stored on servers), and this does not include data in transit (data being transferred) or data being processed.
  • Risk assessment: Agencies must conduct risk assessments based on confidentiality, integrity, and availability to determine the appropriate level of security and cloud deployment.
  • Security controls: The guidelines mandate strict access controls, encryption, and compliance with international standards (e.g., ISO 27001) for sensitive data.
  • Legal compliance: The framework aligns with the Official Information Act, PDPA, Cybersecurity Act, and other national security regulations.

Implications and Action Steps for Government Agencies and Cloud Providers

Under the new guidelines, cloud adoption will be highly encouraged for government agencies. Any deviation from the cloud-first approach will need to be justified, with the decision-making process documented.

Government agencies who have implemented or are seeking to implement cloud technology will need to review and update their internal policies to align with the new guidelines, implement robust data classification and risk assessment processes for all digital services before migrating data to the cloud, and plan cloud migrations accordingly.

To be eligible for government contracts, cloud service providers will need to meet stringent security, localization, and compliance standards, and prepare for increased scrutiny regarding data residency, security certifications, and service transparency.

Outlook

These new guidelines represent a significant step forward in Thailand’s digital government strategy. All stakeholders should familiarize themselves with the requirements to ensure compliance, minimize risk, and support the secure and efficient adoption of cloud technology in the public sector.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
Read More
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
Read More
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
Read More
July 27, 2026
A new decree on penalties for violations related to the crypto asset market creates compliance risks for offshore crypto asset exchanges in Vietnam that do not hold, and practically cannot obtain, a Vietnamese license, and for Vietnamese users who continue to transact on those platforms. Decree No. 284/2026/ND-CP (Decree 284), issued by the government of Vietnam on July 16, 2026, formally establishes an administrative penalty framework for violations related to crypto assets and the crypto asset market. The decree takes effect on September 1, 2026, and will remain in force for the duration of the five-year pilot program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP, which is scheduled to end in September 2030. Direct Penalties on Vietnamese Users The most immediate commercial risk to offshore platforms is that their Vietnamese users now face direct personal liability for using their exchanges. Vietnamese users who trade crypto assets outside of a Ministry of Finance-licensed service provider face fines of up to VND 50 million (approximately USD 1,900). Vietnamese users trading in crypto assets that are offered or issued to foreign users face higher penalties of up to VND 100 million (approximately USD 3,800). It is expected that Vietnamese users will be more willing to migrate away from offshore platforms now that there is a risk of real enforcement against them. Penalties on Unlicensed Service Providers Violations of providing crypto asset services or advertising crypto-related services without a license face fines of up to VND 200 million (approximately USD 7,700). Operating a crypto asset trading market without proper authorization falls within the same highest penalty bands. Organizations that violate issuance, provision, or disclosure rules may face fines of up to VND 200 million. Although the maximum administrative fine per violation is capped at VND 200 million for organizations and VND 100 million for individuals, these
Read More