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 28, 2018

Vietnam’s Controversial New Cybersecurity Law Raises Questions

Informed Counsel

Despite wide concern from inside and outside the country, and even after a request for postponement from 13 Vietnamese technology associations, Vietnam’s new Law on Cybersecurity was finally adopted by the National Assembly on June 12, 2018, after more than a dozen drafts and wide debate in the business and government sectors. The Cybersecurity Law will come into effect on January 1, 2019.

The Cybersecurity Law applies to domestic and foreign companies providing services to customers in Vietnam over telecom networks or the internet, such as social networks, search engines, online advertising, online streaming/‌broadcasting, e-commerce websites/‌marketplaces, internet-based voice/text services (OTT services), cloud services, online games, and online applications.

With its broad scope of application, the Cybersecurity Law potentially imposes tremendous obligations on both onshore and, especially, offshore companies providing online services to Vietnamese customers. For example, the new law requires that owners of websites, portals, and social networks do not provide, post, or transmit any information that is propaganda against the Vietnamese government; instigates violent disturbances, disrupts security, or disturbs public order; contains humiliating or slanderous information; or contains fabricated or untrue information (in specified contexts).

This means websites and social networks must not post or allow their users to post “anti-state,” “offensive,” or “inciting” content. Furthermore, service providers must develop mechanisms to monitor, verify, and take down prohibited content posted by their users within 24 hours after receiving a request from government authorities. Similar but conflicting requirements exist in other legislation; for example, regulations on general websites and social networks set a time limit of three hours for service providers to take down violating content. This is a discrepancy that will need to be resolved or have further guidance for implementation.

These requirements may diminish the website/social network operators’ “safe harbor” under other valid legislation that protects them from the responsibility to monitor or supervise digital information of their users, or investigate breaches of the law arising from the process of transmitting or storing digital information of their users.

In addition, domestic and foreign companies providing services over telecom networks or the internet or value-added services in cyberspace in Vietnam must:

  • authenticate users’ information upon registration;
  • keep user information confidential; and
  • cooperate with Vietnamese authorities to provide information on their users when such users are investigated or deemed to have breached laws on cybersecurity.

Furthermore, Article 26.3 of the new law states:

Domestic and foreign enterprises providing services on telecommunication networks or the internet or value-added services in cyberspace in Vietnam with activities of collecting, exploiting, analyzing, and processing personal information data, data on the relationships of service users, or data generated by service users in Vietnam must store such data in Vietnam for the period prescribed by the government.

This language is broad and vague enough to cover a wide range of businesses and data in this current high-tech era. In addition, it is not clear how these requirements would actually be implemented in practice unless there are subordinate regulations specifically providing guidance for its implementation. For example, would a small social network of animal lovers sharing information about pets be required to open a branch or representative office in Vietnam, just because it provides social network services in cyberspace and collects personal data of Vietnamese users who join the network?

It is worth noting that some restrictions on cross-border transfer of Vietnamese users’ information found in earlier drafts of the law have been removed or relaxed in the adopted version. Under the new law, both onshore and offshore online service providers appear to no longer be required to store their users’ information “only” within Vietnam and comply with specified assessment procedures before transferring any “critical data” outside of Vietnam. Instead, they are simply required to store Vietnamese users’ information within Vietnam for a certain period of time. However, during this statutory retention period, the law does not appear to expressly prohibit the online service providers from duplicating the data or transferring/storing such duplicated data outside of Vietnam.

Further, the controversial requirement from previous drafts that offshore service providers must place servers in Vietnam has also been removed from the final version. However, by requiring offshore service providers to “store” Vietnamese users’ information in Vietnam, the law effectively forces these providers to have servers in Vietnam, either by directly owning/operating the servers or leasing servers owned/operated by other service providers in Vietnam to store such information.

Another area of concern is that the broad scope and power given to the cybersecurity authorities may create a high risk of abuse if there are no proper procedures in place and/or no further regulations on how and when they can take action on content and other issues. The law requires companies not only to comply with the cybersecurity authorities’ requests and instructions, but also to help them implement their cybersecurity protection measures, which include blocking or restricting the operation of information systems (Article 5.1 and 42.3). Moreover, the cybersecurity authorities will be authorized to conduct ad hoc inspections of an organization’s information systems when there are cybersecurity incidents or breaches considered critical to national security (Article 13). This could also put individual privacy at risk, with personal information subject to being scrutinized by the cybersecurity authorities.

Many industry experts have expressed concerns that the law will create obstacles and disadvantages for cyberspace activities and the business environment in Vietnam, and have questioned how the law would effectively achieve its purpose of ensuring national security. In particular, the most problematic issues of data localization/retention and business presence requirements in the law could be seen as a big step backward, which could potentially have adverse effects on international commitments made by Vietnam in multilateral trade agreements, such as the EVFTA, CPTPP, and Vietnam’s WTO Commitments, all of which promote trade liberalization and minimizing technical barriers to trade.

Time will be needed for the Vietnamese government to prepare to implement the Cybersecurity Law, and many details will need to be further clarified. According to public statements from the Director General of the Cybersecurity Department of the Ministry of Public Security, there will need to be 25 subordinate regulations (decrees and circulars) drafted and issued in the coming time.

Any onshore and offshore online service providers wishing to provide services to customers in Vietnam would be well advised to assess the Cybersecurity Law and prepare themselves to comply with these requirements before they take effect on January 1, 2019.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

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
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
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 20, 2026
On July 16, 2026, Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) published a notification in the Government Gazette establishing detailed rules governing data subjects’ right of access under section 30 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA). The notification will take effect 60 days after publication—mid-September 2026—giving data controllers a limited window to bring their processes into compliance. Scope The notification covers requests to access or obtain copies of personal data and requests for disclosure of the source of data collected without consent. Data subjects may exercise their rights directly or through authorized representatives. Key Requirements Important requirements set by the notification include the following: Required request channels. Controllers must provide at least two request channels: direct submission at the business location and registered mail. Electronic channels are optional but, if offered, may also be used for fulfilling requests. Request contents. Requests must be in writing or in electronic form and include the data subject’s name, the preferred access method, details of the data requested, and the requester’s signature. Controllers may request additional identifying information as needed. Identity and authority verification. Controllers may require official identity documents for verification. Authorized representatives must provide authorization documents and identity documents for both the data subject and the representative. Alternative verification methods (e.g., digital authentication) are permitted if they do not unreasonably obstruct data subjects’ rights. Review and response timelines. Controllers must review requests within 15 days. If the request is incomplete, the controller must notify the requester and allow at least 15 days to correct deficiencies. If not corrected, the request may be treated as abandoned. Once verified, controllers must fulfill requests within 30 days, extendable by another 30 days for large-volume or complex requests with notice to the requester. Methods for providing access or copies. Controllers may fulfill