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

February 27, 2024

Thailand Lays Out New Cybersecurity Standards

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s National Cyber Security Committee (NCSC) released three notifications under the Cybersecurity Act on January 18, 2024, setting cybersecurity-related requirements for key organizations and assets. While one of these notifications already took effect, the two most notable will take effect on January 18, 2025 (i.e., one year from their publication in the Government Gazette).

These two are the NCSC Notification Re: Standards for Defining the Security Category for Data or Information Systems B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Notification on Security Category”) and the NCSC Notification Re: Minimum Standards for Data and Information Systems B.E. 2566 (2023) (“Notification on Minimum Standards”).

These notifications apply to:

  • State agencies;
  • Supervising or regulating organizations (i.e., state organizations, private organizations, or persons designated by law to regulate or supervise the affairs of state organizations or critical information infrastructure organizations); and
  • Critical information infrastructure organizations (i.e., organizations related to or providing national security, significant public services, banking and finance, information technologies and telecommunications, transportation and logistics, energy and public utilities, and public health).

Collectively these are defined as “Organizations” under the notifications.

Notification on Security Category

The Notification on Security Category sets forth risk-based security classifications—or “security categories”—for Organizations’ data or information systems.

For security category assessment purposes, Organizations are required to perform a self-assessment of their data or information systems based on three key security objectives: confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Each of these objectives is further categorized into three risk levels (low, medium, and high), taking into account the assessment of potential impact in the following areas:

  • Organizations’ financial value or reputation;
  • Organizations’ number of service users;
  • Organizations’ ability to perform their duties;
  • State stability or public order.

The risk levels for the three objectives are determined by considering whether there are “minimal,” “severe,” or “serious severe” effects, as described below:

  • Confidentiality (not including data classified as “secret,” which follows different criteria): The effects of unauthorized disclosure of data on Organizations’ reputation and financial value;
  • Integrity: The effects of unauthorized alteration or destruction of data on Organizations’ performance; and
  • Availability: The effects of inability to access or use the data or information system on Organizations’ performance.

If their systems handle different types of data, Organizations must assess each type and set the security category based on the highest risk level identified.

The security category should be reviewed at least once every three years, with the results properly recorded.

Notification on Minimum Standards

Once the security category is determined, Organizations are responsible for applying the minimum cybersecurity measures stipulated in the Notification on Minimum Standards. These measures are outlined in the table below, which indicates the items that are required for minimum cybersecurity measures under each security category.

For more information on compliance with these notifications under the Cybersecurity Act, or on any aspect of cybersecurity in Thailand, please contact Athistha (Nop) Chitranukroh at [email protected], Nopparat Lalitkomon at [email protected], Napassorn Lertussavavivat at [email protected], or Rada Lamsam at [email protected].

Related Professionals

Industries

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