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

July 24, 2025

Draft of Vietnam’s Consolidated 2025 Cybersecurity Law Released

Subscribe to Updates

Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security recently released a draft version of the 2025 Cybersecurity Law, which is intended to replace both the existing 2018 Cybersecurity Law and the 2015 Law on Network Information Security (LNIS). This consolidation reflects a broader effort by the Vietnamese government to streamline and centralize the legal framework governing cybersecurity, data protection, and information security to be under the sole authority of the Ministry of Public Security, moving away from the previous sharing of responsibility with the former Ministry of Information and Communications (which ceased operations earlier this year and merged with the Ministry of Science and Technology). This shift aims to eliminate overlaps and improve enforcement efficiency.

The draft law is built upon the foundation of principles and provisions of both the 2018 Cybersecurity Law and the 2015 LNIS, while also introducing a wide range of amendments and new regulations. By merging the two laws, the government seeks to reduce legal fragmentation and ensure consistency in definitions, obligations, and enforcement mechanisms across related domains like data protection, IT system classification, and cybercrime prevention. The newly introduced amendments include enhanced obligations for service providers, stricter controls on information transmission, classification of IT systems, designation and protection of nationally important information systems, and sector-specific violations and compliance requirements.

Highlights of the draft law are discussed below.

Definition and Obligations of Service Providers

The draft law clearly defines and significantly broadens the scope of entities considered “service providers” under its jurisdiction. This now includes businesses and individuals offering products or services in cyberspace, including both infrastructure and content online services, such as:

  • Internet service providers (ISPs) and providers of telecommunications, hosting, servers, domain names, VPNs, proxy services, and cloud computing;
  • Providers of social networks, websites, and online gaming;
  • Financial institutions, banks, foreign bank branches in Vietnam, e-wallet providers, payment intermediaries, stock exchanges, and digital asset platforms;
  • E-commerce platforms;
  • Logistics providers;
  • Digital television providers; and
  • Other online service providers.

The draft law prescribes specific obligations for online service providers, notably to (i) cooperate with the authorities and facilitate the investigation and handling of cybersecurity violations; (ii) terminate, freeze, identify, and reauthenticate digital accounts, and suspend transactions; (iii) and block, temporarily suspend, or terminate the operation of websites and information systems upon request by a competent authority, among other obligations. These obligations appear to codify the authority’s power to restrict or intervene in online operations and activities in response to cybersecurity violations.

Online Information Management

The draft law generally requires the classification of online information based on its level of confidentiality, mandating the application of appropriate protection measures, including establishing policies and procedures to handle online information. Moreover, the draft law prohibits falsifying the source of the information and sending online commercial information without the recipient’s consent or when the recipient has refused, unless otherwise prescribed by law. This marks a significant tightening of rules around unsolicited digital communications.

Under the draft law, telecommunications enterprises, telecommunications application service providers and IT service providers are required to (i) prevent and address illegal online information communications (including but not limited to spam and fake or infringing information) and (ii) implement mechanisms that allow recipients to refuse such communication. These obligations reflect the government’s intent to strengthen control over harmful digital content. However, they may impose significant compliance burdens on service providers, particularly in terms of monitoring, filtering, and user interface design.

IT System Classification and Protection Requirements

While the LNIS prescribes five classification levels for IT systems based on their importance and sensitivity, the draft law provides only three levels. Notably, level 3 IT systems (those whose sabotage would cause particularly serious harm to public interest, social order, and safety, or pose a serious threat to national defense and security) are designated as important national IT systems and subject to enhanced protection requirements and obligations.

The draft law provides an initial list of important national IT systems, which includes those in the fields of energy, finance, banking, telecommunications, transport, natural resources and environment, chemicals, health, culture, and news media, and sets out that the prime minister will promulgate, amend, and supplement the list at a later stage. Level 3 IT systems would need to undergo cybersecurity eligibility assessments, be certified, and then be subject to annual reporting requirements and unscheduled inspections by the Ministry of Public Security.

Removal of Data Localization and Local Presence Requirements

The 2018 Cybersecurity Law requires foreign and domestic service providers who provide services in cyberspace to store certain regulated data in Vietnam and under specific circumstances establish a local presence in Vietnam, upon the authority’s request. These requirements have been removed under the draft law. This shift reflects a more flexible regulatory approach aimed at balancing national security interests with the realities of global digital business. It also aligns with Vietnam’s commitments under international treaties and standards, promoting freer cross-border data flows while maintaining compliance with the new 2025 Personal Data Protection Law, which remains central to data governance.

Preventing and Combating High-Tech Cybercrime

The draft law introduces a new chapter dedicated to the prevention, detection, and handling of high-tech cybercrime. It outlines the responsibilities of government agencies, organizations, businesses, and individuals in combating such crimes. This addition reflects the growing concern over cybercriminals using advanced technologies to conduct fraud and other illegal activities.

Outlook

The draft 2025 Cybersecurity Law is currently undergoing public consultation and is expected to be refined through several rounds of feedback before being presented to the 15th National Assembly for deliberation during its 10th session in October 2025. Businesses should stay informed and consider participating in the consultation process to help shape the final version of the law and ensure their operational interests are represented.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) could soon see some important changes, as a draft bill to amend the PDPA has been introduced in the House of Representatives. The draft amendment is currently in the public consultation phase, with comments accepted from July 16 to August 15, 2026. If enacted in its current form, the amendment would make three key changes: expanding the government exemption to cover anticorruption operations, introducing a statutory definition of “government agency,” and restructuring the lawful bases for personal data processing to align with international standards. Background The PDPA has encountered several enforcement challenges since its implementation, including three core problems identified by the bill’s sponsors: (1) the current exemptions for government agencies do not cover anticorruption and misconduct-prevention operations; (2) the PDPA lacks a clear statutory definition of “government agency,” causing legal uncertainty as to which entities are covered; and (3) the existing framework for lawful bases of data processing does not align with international standards—particularly the multiple-lawful-bases system in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—making compliance inflexible for both government and private sector entities. Expanded Government Exemption The current PDPA exempts government agencies performing duties related to national security (including fiscal security), public safety, anti-money laundering, forensic science, and cybersecurity. The proposed amendment adds “prevention and suppression of corruption and misconduct” to this list of exempted functions. This would allow anticorruption bodies—most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which is identified as a directly affected party—to collect, use, and disclose personal data without being subject to PDPA requirements when carrying out their duties. New Statutory Definition of “Government Agency” Notably, while the current PDPA use the term “government agency” in several provisions, the term is not comprehensively defined, creating potential uncertainty as to its scope. The draft bill therefore
Read More
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