Data Privacy Regulations That Are Applicable to Cloud Computing in China
In the area of data and privacy regulation, PRC law currently has the following major sources: (i) national laws, (ii) administrative regulations and rules, and (iii) national standards.
At the level of national laws, the Cyber Security Law of the PRC (CSL), the Data Security Law of the PRC (DSL), and the Personal Information Protection Law of the PRC (PIPL), are three fundamental laws regulating data and privacy issues, which are applicable to cloud computing and relevant data processing activities in the PRC.
Those three national laws are implemented mainly by administrative regulations, rules and regulatory documents issued by the competent regulatory governmental agencies. For example, the Measures on Assessing the Security of Cloud Computing Services specifies the security requirements of the Cyber Security Law and the Data Security Law in the scenario where the cloud computing services are provided to the administration agencies, the operators of Critical Information Infrastructure (CII) and the party offices.
In addition, the national standards, compulsory and recommended, also play an important role in implementing those three laws from the perspective of technical, organisational and law-fulfilling measures. The compulsory standards establish the minimum requirements for legal compliance, while the recommended standards showcase best practices. For example, the Information security technology – Security guidance for cloud computing service (GB/T 31167-2023) provides recommendations and guidance on security management and technical measures to protect data on the cloud through its life cycle. Another national standard, the Cybersecurity technology – Assessment method for security capability of cloud computing service (GB/T 34942-2025), will become effective on 1 February 2026. It provides recommendations and guidance for cloud computing service providers or third-party agencies on assessing the security risk of the cloud computing service.
Another unique security requirement applicable to the cloud services hosted in China is the Multi-Layer Protection Scheme (MLPS). MLPS is a requirement imposed in accordance with Article 21 of the CSL and focuses on the infrastructure security of the cloud service that facilitates the protection of the data and personal information processed in the cloud service.
Definition of Personal Data and Sensitive Data
Note that in this guide, personal data and personal information, sensitive data and sensitive personal information are used interchangeably with the same meaning.
According to Article 4 of the PIPL, personal data refers to all types of information of identified or identifiable individuals recorded in electronic or other means, excluding anonymous information.
According to Article 28 of the PIPL, sensitive personal data refers to personal data, the leakage or illegal use of which could easily result in damage to the dignity of an individual, or harm to personal body and property, including biometric information, religion, specific identities, medical and health information, financial accounts, location tracking data, as well as the personal data of minors under the age of 14.
Requirements for Processing Personal Data in the Cloud
The data processor under the PIPL is the counterpart of the data controller under the GDPR, and the processing contractor of a data processor is the counterpart of the data processor under the GDPR. As it is inevitable to distinguish the data controller and the data processor in the cloud environment, for convenience of non-PRC readers, the terms “data controller” and “data processor” of the GDPR are used in this guide in response to the questions about the PRC law.
Therefore, in this article, “data controller” refers to the “personal information processor” that can autonomously decide the purpose and method of processing data under the PRC law; and “data processor” refers to the “processing contractor” that is processing data upon the request of the controller.
Chinese laws and regulations do not provide special requirements for processing personal data in the cloud, which is subject to the same requirements provided in the PIPL for processing personal data in general.
Under the PIPL, the primary requirement for processing personal data is consent or separate consent. There are also legally defined exceptional processing scenarios where no consent or separate consent is required.
Consent and the requirement
Under Article 13 of the PIPL, processing personal data should have a proper legal basis, including consent, or other legal bases that may allow for consent to be waived as illustrated below. To ensure informed consent is obtained, before processing their personal data, a controller must inform individuals truthfully, accurately and fully of the following information in a prominent way and in clear and plain language:
In addition, according to Article 21 of the Regulation on Network Data Security Management (RNDSM), if the processed data is network data, then the data controller must specify in the form of a checklist the purpose, method and type of personal information to be collected and provided to other network data controllers. If the personal data of minors under the age of 14 is processed, then a special notice or processing rule specific for these minors shall be provided.
Separate consent and the requirement
Under the PIPL, there are several processing activities that require separate consents, including processing sensitive personal data, cross-border transfers of personal data, providing personal data to another data controller, publicly disclosing personal data, etc. While the PIPL itself lacks a precise definition of “separate consent”, practical guidance can be found in the recommended national standard GB/T 42574-2023 (Information security technology – Implementation guidelines for notices and consent in personal information processing). This standard clarifies that separate consent signifies a specific, explicit agreement given by the individual solely for a particular processing activity concerning their personal data. Crucially, it does not encompass blanket consent given for multiple processing purposes simultaneously.
Exceptional consent-waiving processing
In addition to consent, the PIPL allows data controllers to process personal data based on several alternative legal grounds:
Under these processing conditions, consent can be waived.
Obligations for Data Controllers and Processors in the Cloud Environment
Under PRC law, data controllers should undertake primary legal responsibilities regarding processing personal data, and data processors shall provide necessary assistance for compliance. That is because, in cloud services, data controllers are the customers (cloud tenants or platform users), and their technical capability to comply with the law will be subject to the technical limit provided by the cloud service providers (as data processor).
Data controller’s obligations
According to the PIPL, data controllers using the cloud services are subject to the following key obligations.
In the cloud environment, data controllers may expect data processors to provide data compliance measures or offer the technical mechanisms or flexibility to allow them to implement such measures independently. Therefore, cloud service providers, as data processors, may need to understand and anticipate such potential requirements in advance.
Data processor’s obligations
Data processors, usually the cloud service providers, are responsible for processing personal data on behalf of data controllers. Their obligations should be geared toward supporting the controller’s compliance efforts and ensuring data protection standards are upheld, including the following.
CSL, DSL, and PIPL provide a general framework for cross-border data transfers. In addition to those three fundamental laws, the Provisions on Promoting and Regulating Cross-border Data Flows has been in effect since March 2024, further facilitating the cross-border transfer of personal data and other types of data outside of China. These laws apply to cross-border data transfers in the cloud environment as well.
According to the above laws, data controllers should undertake the legal obligation concerning cross-border data transfers in the cloud, and data processors should comply with data controllers’ instructions concerning cross-border transfers (for example, the instruction of not transferring personal data outside of China).
Below is a summary of the key PRC law requirements with respect to cross-border data transfers.
Cloud providers as data processors must collaborate with data controllers to ensure that the data transfer arrangements meet Chinese regulatory requirements. This involves aligning cloud security protocols with Chinese standards and providing support for assessments that should be completed by the data controller under the regulatory mechanism. Data controllers are advised to include specific clauses in their contracts with cloud service providers to address cross-border data transfer obligations. Please see details in 3. Data Ownership and Control.
Chinese data privacy laws do not impose penalties specifically for data controllers and data processors in the cloud environment. In practice, the penalties vary depending on the role of the legal entities. Below are penalties applicable to each role under Chinese laws and regulations.
Penalties for Data Controllers
Data controllers bear primary responsibility for ensuring the legality, security and transparency of personal data processing activities. The penalties for non-compliance include administrative penalties, civil liabilities and criminal liabilities in severe cases.
Penalties for Data Processors
Data processors, usually cloud service providers, are responsible for processing personal data according to the instructions of the data controllers. Processors can also face significant penalties for non-compliance.
Security Measures Required by the PRC Law for Data Stored in the Cloud
The security of the cloud computing environment is jointly safeguarded by cloud service providers and their customers. The CSL requires network operators to take security measures to protect the security of the cloud and services derived from it, hosted in China and the data stored in the cloud.
The PIPL requires personal data controllers to take technical measures to ensure the security of personal data. Legal requirements in the PIPL apply to processing activities of personal data stored in the cloud, which are summarised below.
The Measures on Assessing the Security of Cloud Computing Services stipulates measures that cloud service providers should comply with when they are providing services to the government and party offices, and the operators of CII. Article 3 of the Measures provides that the security assessment of such cloud services should concentrate on, inter alia: (i) the security of the cloud platform technology, products and supply chain; (ii) the ability to manage security effectively and the strength of the cloud platform’s security protection measures; (iii) the feasibility and ease with which customers can transfer their data; and (iv) the business continuity of the cloud service provider.
In addition, there are a few recommended national standards concerning cloud computing services that specify security measures for cloud services. For example, the standard Information Security Technology – Security Capability Requirements for Cloud Computing Services (GB/T 31168-2023) highlights the security technical measures that cloud service providers need to deploy. There are 11 types of security measures in total, including system development and supply chain, system and communication protection, access control, data protection, management of configuration, operational maintenance, emergency response, audit, risk assessment and continuous monitoring, security management and personnel, and physical and environmental security. The goal of those measures is to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data stored in the cloud.
Encryption Standards for Data in Transit and at Rest in the Cloud
Access Controls in the Cloud Environment
Handling of Security Accidents and Breaches in the Cloud
Data Ownership and Control in Cloud Agreements
As a basic principle in a typical cloud business, data in the cloud is owned and controlled by the cloud service customers unless otherwise agreed. The cloud service providers and the cloud service customers are recommended to specify the following in the cloud agreement.
Data Subjects’ Rights Over Their Data
In the cloud environment, personal data subjects have rights to their personal data as defined in the PIPL, including the right to know and the right to decide how their personal data is processed, unless otherwise provided by the laws and regulations.
Specifically, the data subjects have the following rights:
How Can Data Subjects Exercise Their Rights to Access, Rectify or Delete Their Data
Data subjects need to submit their requests directly to the controller. PIPL requires the data controller to establish a convenient mechanism for accepting and processing requests from personal data subjects in a timely manner.
In the cloud environment, cloud service customers may need support from cloud service providers to fulfil the data subjects’ requests concerning their personal data; for example, the right to access, rectify and delete their personal data stored in the cloud. Therefore, in the cloud agreement, the cloud service customer and the cloud service provider may specify the mechanism and procedures to deal with the personal data subjects’ requests in detail, as well as Standard Operation Procedures (SOP) that must be followed by both parties.
Article 45 of the PIPL provides data subjects with a data portability right: where an individual requests to transfer their personal data to a personal data controller designated by them that meets the conditions stipulated by the CAC, the personal data controller shall provide a way for the transfer. Article 25 of the RNDSM further stipulates that the network data controller shall provide channels for third parties that are designated by the data subject to access or obtain relevant personal information if certain conditions are met. However, the PIPL and its relevant laws have not provided details regarding how to respond to the data portability request in the cloud.
To ensure that the right to data portability is respected, both the cloud customer and the cloud service provider are advised to clearly define in the cloud agreement how such requests will be handled.
The general legal requirement provided in the PIPL concerning data retention and deletion applies to processing in the cloud.
Conducting thorough due diligence is crucial to ensuring compliance with Chinese laws and regulations, particularly those related to data security, cybersecurity and personal information protection. The following is a short, high-level checklist for basic due diligence based on applicable Chinese legal requirements.
A cloud service agreement is critical to ensure data protection in the cloud environment. The cloud service agreement may include the following data protection requirements. Details regarding data processing can be found in 4.3 Data Processing Agreements and the Cloud.
Article 21 of the PIPL provides the necessary coverage of a data processing agreement (DPA), which should include: the purpose, time limit and method of processing personal data, type of personal data and protection measures, as well as the rights and obligations of both parties, and mechanisms for supervising the data processor’s personal data processing activities.
According to the above law, national standards and mainstream market practice in the PRC, a well-structured DPA should define the responsibilities of both parties. The following is an overview of how DPAs are typically structured in a cloud business in the PRC.
The recommended national standard GB/T 31167-2023 Information security technology – Security guidance for cloud computing services in its Article 9 provides guidance on how to determine proper exist strategies and data migration in practice, including the following.
The CSL, DSL, and PIPL stipulate the reporting obligations in the event of data breaches. In addition to these general legal requirements, the CAC, China’s data protection regulator, further refines specific reporting requirements through its regulatory rules. There are two sets of different requirements regarding personal data breaches and cybersecurity incidents, which are detailed below.
Personal Data Breaches
In the event of personal data breaches, the PIPL requires the personal data controller to notify the competent authorities in a timely manner. This enables the authorities to understand the situation at the outset and take accurate and effective regulatory measures. The specific matters to be reported are detailed in 5.3 Notifying Data Breaches.
According to Article 66 of the PIPL, personal data controllers failing to fulfil reporting obligations will be subject to administrative penalties. The penalties start with orders to rectify, warnings, confiscation of illegal gains, and orders to suspend or terminate relevant application services; refusal to correct will result in fines of up to CNY1 million. For more severe violations, higher fines may be imposed, along with suspension of business operations or revocation of relevant business licenses or permits.
Cybersecurity Incidents
The CAC released the Measures for the Administration of National Cybersecurity Incident Reporting (the “Reporting Measures”) in September 2025, which will become effective on 1 November 2025. The Reporting Measures clarified the reporting procedures and requirements in the event of cybersecurity incidents.
The Reporting Measures stipulate that network operators failing to report cybersecurity incidents as required may face legal liabilities under related laws or administrative regulations, which could include orders to rectify, warnings and fines. If competent authorities consider the circumstances severe, heavy fines or even business suspension/termination may be imposed. However, the Reporting Measures also provide that if a company has taken reasonable and necessary protective measures to minimise the harm of data breaches, dealt with the data breach according to its emergency response plan and proactively reported as required, liability may be exempted or mitigated accordingly.
Article 10 of the RNDSM also stipulates that network products and services provided by a network data controller shall comply with the compulsory requirements of the relevant national standards. If there is any risk such as security defect or vulnerability, the network data controller shall take remedial measures forthwith, notify users in a timely manner and report the same to the relevant competent authority. If there is any harm to the national security or public interest caused by the security defect or vulnerability, the network data controller shall also report it to the relevant competent authority within 24 hours. The above reporting obligation also applies to cloud service providers and cloud service users.
The CSL requires network operators to formulate emergency response plans for cybersecurity incidents. When the incident happens, network operators must immediately activate the emergency response plans, take remedial measures and report to the competent authorities.
Therefore, for cloud service providers and customers, developing an emergency response plan is crucial for investigations and remediation upon a data breach that occurred in the cloud. More information regarding data breaches can be found in 2.1 Data Security and the Cloud and 4.1 Due Diligence.
Notification Obligations Under the PIPL
Article 57 of the PIPL sets out a general notification mechanism, which includes the two aspects detailed below.
Notifying personal data subjects and regulatory authorities
As a default rule under the PIPL, the personal data controller has the obligation to notify affected subjects and authorities. Notification to the authorities is mandatory, whereas notification to the personal data subjects is not.
Article 57 provides that if the personal data controllers take measures that can effectively prevent harm from the breach, they can be exempt from notifying the affected personal data subjects, unless specifically required by the authorities. The PIPL does not explicitly define a clear threshold for when notification becomes necessary. Nor does it outline specific timelines for such notifications.
Information to be notified
The notification should include information such as: (i) the categories of personal data that have been or may be leaked, altered or lost, the causes of such incidents, and the potential harm they may cause; (ii) the remedial measures taken by the personal data controllers and the mitigation measures that personal data subjects may take; and (iii) the contact information of the personal data controller.
Key Considerations
It is important to note that the above is only a high-level legal requirement provided by the PIPL. In practice, regulators may request more extensive information based on their working rules and specific cases. Cloud service customers may want to consider the following in handling data breach notification matters:
Please refer to details in 1.2 Data Privacy and Cross-Border Transfers.
PRC law does not have a generally applicable and absolute data localisation requirement. However, the CSL, DSL and PIPL impose localisation requirements on certain specific types of data and outline the administrative requirements for cross-border transfers of such data.
Data localisation requirements have a direct effect on the compliance of cloud computing services. The slow and ambiguous identification of Important Data raises concerns regarding data transfers in and out of the PRC. Cloud service providers and users need to have a data compliance strategy in place that allows them to address the concern of data localisation requirements in the PRC.
Among cross-border data transfers, it is not uncommon for legal systems or judicial procedures of different jurisdictions to clash. For instance, in cross-border litigation, a US governmental agency may require a company in China to present data information in its routine regulatory check or special investigation. However, under the DSL and PIPL, submitting personal information or data stored in China to foreign law enforcement authorities is subject to prior approval from the competent Chinese regulatory authority. The approval process in China may be complex and time-consuming, making it difficult to meet the demands of the foreign law enforcement authority in a timely fashion. The conflicts of laws between different jurisdictions may therefore increase compliance costs and legal risks for multinational companies.
Addressing such an issue requires clearly understanding the nature and type of the data request from the foreign authority, and the scope and procedure of the PRC data cross-border approval. Although potentially complex and time-consuming, successful resolution involves collaboration between PRC counsel well-versed in Chinese law and foreign counsel familiar with the requesting country’s law enforcement procedures.
In China, the personal data processing compliance audit was introduced in the PIPL in 2021, and regulatory requirements related to it have been gradually taking shape since then. On 1 May 2025, the Administrative Measures for Compliance Audits of Personal Information Protection (the “Audit Measures”) came into effect, which apply to personal data processing activities conducted by personal data controllers in all scenarios, including cloud-based processing.
In July 2024, the national recommended standard Data Security Technology – Personal Information Protection Compliance Audit Requirements (the “Standard”) was introduced for public comment, which provides more comprehensive and practical guidance based on the Audit Measures.
In May 2025, the National Information Security Standardisation Technical Committee issued the Practical Guidelines for Cybersecurity Standards Practices – Requirements for Compliance Audits of Personal Information Protection (TC260-PG-20255A) (the “Guideline”), which provides further details on conducting the audit in practice.
Cloud service providers and cloud service customers should comply with the above in their personal data processing once they become final and effective. The following is a summary of the key aspects of personal information protection compliance audits in the Audit Measures and the Standard.
Occurrence of Compliance Audit
As an independent supervisory mechanism to confirm and ascertain a personal data controller is processing personal data in accordance with the law, a compliance audit is mandatory. Companies that process personal data are required to conduct audits on a regular basis (every two years or longer, as the case may be). Audits can be performed internally by the company itself or by engaging third-party professional agencies.
Additionally, if the regulatory authorities find that there is a significant risk in the processing of personal data or if a personal data breach occurs, the authorities may require the personal data controller to engage a third-party agency for a compliance audit. This is a type of audit process triggered by regulators.
A compliance audit generally involves several processes, including audit preparation, audit implementation, audit reporting, issue rectification and archive management.
Key Areas of Compliance Audit
The scope of a compliance audit can be very broad, covering almost all aspects of personal data processing activities and the obligations provided by the PIPL. Key areas include, but are not limited to the following:
Independence, Fairness and Comprehensiveness of Compliance Audit
The Standard and the Guideline provide an essential guide to understanding and complying with the principles of independence, fairness and comprehensiveness of a compliance audit, covering aspects such as the audit process, implementation management, evidence management, qualifications of auditors, etc.
In terms of evidence management, the Standard requires that the audited party must ensure the authenticity, completeness, and validity of the evidence provided. Only evidence that meets both formal and substantive requirements can be accepted and used in the audit report.
Implementation of Compliance Audit Findings and Recommendations
The Standard and the Guideline highlight that once the audit report is completed and delivered, the audited party should address the identified issues within a specified timeframe. Auditors have the right to confirm the status of rectification.
Penalties for Non-Compliance
Personal data controllers who fail to conduct compliance audits as required or improperly perform such audits will be subject to administrative penalties under Article 66 of the PIPL. In cases where the violation is even more severe and constitutes a crime, criminal liability may also be imposed.
36th Floor
Shanghai One ICC
No 999 Middle Huaihai Road
Xuhui District
Shanghai 200031
China
+86 21 2310 8288
+86 21 2310 8299
vincentwang@glo.com.cn www.glo.com.cnBusiness Development, Industrial Policies and Legal Framework of Cloud Computing in China
In recent years, the Chinese cloud computing market has maintained a high growth trajectory. According to statistics released by the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology (CAICT), the market size reached CNY828.8 billion in 2024, representing a 34.4% increase compared to 2023. As a core infrastructure underpinning the development of the digital economy, cloud computing has seen its strategic significance and industrial value increasingly highlighted. Over the past decade, China has gradually established a multi-layered and comprehensive policy and regulatory system for cloud computing, forming an overall framework aimed at national strategy, guided by laws and regulations, implemented through technical standards, and driven by industrial policies. Since 2020, the focus of cloud computing policy has increasingly shifted from promoting general adoption to targeted, in-depth development within key industries, particularly in government affairs, finance and healthcare.
Since the State Council incorporated cloud computing industry into the core technology development industries under the 13th Five-Year Plan for National Informatization in 2016, China has entered a period of intensive introduction of industrial policies for cloud computing. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) has successively released the Three-Year Action Plan for Cloud Computing Development (2017–2019), the Implementation Guidelines for Promoting Enterprises to Access the Cloud (2018–2020) and the Three-Year Action Plan for New Data Centre Development (2021–2023). These policy documents have progressively built a relatively comprehensive system for industrial development, focusing on technological breakthroughs, industrial applications and security assurance.
At the legal level, the principle of China’s cloud computing legal framework gives priority to security and controllability. At this stage, China has not yet enacted dedicated legislation specifically addressing cloud computing. Instead, it has established a foundational legal triangle of cybersecurity and data compliance, primarily through the Cybersecurity Law (2017), the Data Security Law (2021) and the Personal Information Protection Law (2021). These laws define cloud service providers’ cybersecurity obligations, data processing rules and personal information protection responsibilities. Meanwhile, China has incorporated national and industrial standards into the legal enforcement mechanism, forming a system where standards serve as essential references. For example, the General Requirements for Cloud Supercomputing (GB/T 45400-2025), which will come into effect in October 2025, not only provide a reference architecture for cloud supercomputing services but also establish a basis for evaluating their service capabilities.
Distinctive features of China’s cloud computing legal system
China’s legal framework for cloud computing demonstrates distinctive features in terms of legislative philosophy, data governance and security certification, which diverge significantly from other jurisdictions.
Legislative philosophy
China mainly emphasises the security and stability of cyberspace, requiring cloud service providers to co-operate in fulfilling relevant cybersecurity and data protection obligations.
By contrast, the European Union places greater emphasis on protecting personal data rights, highlighting core rights such as the “right to be forgotten” and the “right to data portability”, with technology subordinated to law and individual rights.
The United States, meanwhile, focuses on government access to data and export control. The CLOUD Act provides a legal basis for cross-border data access, primarily aimed at ensuring convenience for law enforcement agencies.
Data governance
China has established a data classification and tiered protection system. For important data or personal information processed by operators of Critical Information Infrastructure (CII), the principle of “domestic storage” applies. Where cross-border transfers are necessary, a data export security assessment must be filed with the Cyberspace Administration of China.
Emerging markets such as Russia and Vietnam have adopted similar systems.
By contrast, the European Union has applied less strict rules on cross-border data flows as stipulated in the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). While safeguarding cross-border data flows, the European Union ensures “an adequate level of protection” through mechanisms such as Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) and Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs).
Security certification system
China has established three principal mechanisms led by the state: the Cloud Computing Service Security Capability Assessment System, the Cybersecurity Level Protection System and the CII Protection System. These certifications directly determine whether a cloud service provider may be qualified to deliver the corresponding cloud services.
Similarly, Singapore has developed a multi-tier government-led cloud security certification, which imposes mandatory requirements across various sectors including government affairs, finance, internet and telecommunications, with different levels of security obligations depending on the scenario.
The European Union, by contrast, adopts a hybrid model of market and regulatory oversight, applying standards such as ISO/IEC 27001. Under such model, third-party organisations conduct audits and assessments of cloud service providers to ensure they meet certification standards and requirements.
The United States relies on the federal FedRAMP certification to ensure that cloud service providers entering the government market meet unified compliance requirements.
Emerging trends in China’s cloud computing regulatory framework
Acceleration of standardisation systems
In 2025, the surge in cloud computing standardisation not only established a framework of technical standards but also reflected increasing reliance of legal enforcement on standardisation. Under the current regulatory framework in China, the Cybersecurity Law, the Data Security Law and Security Protection Regulations for CII impose security and compliance obligations on cloud service providers. These laws and regulations still need to be implemented through technical standards. The standardisation strategy clarifies technical standards and also serves as an important guide for cloud market participants. For cloud service providers, compliance with relevant standards determines their eligibility to operate in specific sectors, such as government departments and CII industries. For cloud service users, unified standards reduce compliance costs, enhance transparency of cloud services, and improve comparability among different service providers.
As of September 2025, there are 54 national standards, 49 industrial standards and ten local standards currently in force in cloud computing. In April 2025, MIIT released the Guidelines for the Construction of a Comprehensive Standardisation System for Cloud Computing, which set the target of formulating over 30 new national and industrial standards by 2027. This indicates that in the coming years, standardisation will remain a core trend in the Chinese cloud computing industry, with the emphasis placed not only on the quantity of standards issued but also on the quality.
In parallel with this trend and in line with China’s national goals of Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality, the standardisation framework is increasingly incorporating sustainability metrics. In practice, China is already advancing the construction of green data centres nationwide. A key step was the implementation of the national standard Evaluation for Green Data Centre (GB/T 44989-2024) on 1 June 2025, providing a unified and measurable framework for assessing and improving the environmental performance of data centres nationwide. Looking ahead, future guidelines are expected to mandate stricter power usage effectiveness (PUE) for data centres and promote green technology standards, pushing the cloud computing industry towards more eco-friendly and energy-efficient designs.
Beyond the domestic market, China is actively engaged in the formulation of international standards, and taking a leading role in meetings of international organisations such as ISO, ITU and IEEE in order to secure greater influence in the global cloud computing industry. The combined approach of domestic legislation and international standards not only provides Chinese companies with institutional support and protection for participation in global competition but also positions them to exert a leading influence in the formulation of international cloud computing standards. As a result, the Chinese cloud computing industry is shifting from “following international rules” to “shaping international rules”.
Strengthening security and compliance
Security and compliance remain central concerns in the development of the Chinese cloud computing industry. Regulatory changes in 2025 indicate that China is shifting cloud computing security oversight from broad framework requirements to more precise, scenario-specific governance. Regarding the security assessment of cloud computing services, the Assessment Method for Security Capability of Cloud Computing Service (GB/T 34942-2025) will come into force on 1 February 2026. Compared with the previous version – ie, GB/T 34942-2017, GB/T 34942-2025 introduces comprehensive assessment and data protection assessment methods, as well as additional advanced requirements for each assessment method. The assessment organisations are allowed to evaluate cloud service providers’ service security capabilities, classifying them into three levels: basic, enhanced or advanced. The 2025 revision draws extensively on international and domestic standards for cloud computing security and assessment, including the US FedRAMP, NIST 800-53A, ISO/IEC 27017 and Chinese Cybersecurity Classified Protection, thereby promoting alignment of the Chinese security assessment system with international practice.
Regulatory oversight of the cloud computing industry has become routine, with its scope and intensity continually expanding. MIIT regularly publishes reports on APPs/SDKs Violating User Rights, which has established continuous monitoring mechanisms on cloud computing services. Regulatory requirements are also integrated into the daily operations of cloud service providers, such as routine monitoring of data security threats and security assessments of outbound data transfers. The chain of responsibility has also extended upstream from cloud service users to providers, with service providers no longer viewed merely as service suppliers but as potential joint bearers of responsibility.
Alongside domestic regulatory changes, the broader international context is exerting an increasing influence. Amid global digital fragmentation, security reviews and compliance requirements are increasingly shaped by geopolitical considerations. Within the CII sector, a clear trend is emerging toward “Sovereign Cloud” infrastructure – emphasising domestic ownership, operational control, and technology sovereignty to insulate core digital infrastructure from external risks.
As security and compliance requirements in the Chinese cloud computing industry increase, the operational scope and responsibility of service providers will become increasingly clear, and the regulatory framework governing the Chinese cloud computing industry will continue to mature.
Integration and innovation with AI
At present, countries worldwide are accelerating the deep integration of cloud computing with AI to enhance competitiveness in the era of AI. In July 2025, CAICT released the “Cloud Computing Blue Book”, which explicitly emphasises the need to “promote the integrated development of cloud computing technologies and industrial applications, thereby supporting the intelligent transformation and upgrading of industry”. Against this backdrop, various forms of AI services delivered through cloud platforms, collectively known as AI as a Service (AIaaS), are expected to become a key factor enabling cloud service providers to reshape existing market structures and gain a competitive edge.
In terms of AI services, China has already issued the Provisional Measures for the Administration of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services (the “Provisional Measures”), which establish a foundational regulatory framework encompassing principles for development, governance, service standards and legal liability of AI services. Cloud service providers configuring, deploying and delivering AIaaS – including intelligent cloud, AI cloud service platforms and generative AI cloud services – must comply with the Provisional Measures.
A key trend within the AIaaS landscape is the rapid emergence of Model as a Service (MaaS), where major cloud providers offer large pre-trained AI models through scalable APIs, significantly reducing the barriers to AI adoption for enterprises across sectors such as healthcare, finance and manufacturing. While MaaS drives innovation and efficiency, it also introduces complex new regulatory challenges around model transparency, data provenance, and intellectual property protection. Industry-specific cloud AI solutions are becoming increasingly common, creating the need for tailored compliance approaches that address sector-specific risks and data handling requirements.
Building on this trend, new regulatory requirements are emerging. China’s regulatory framework mandates a filing system for specific categories of algorithms that pose potential risks to public interests and security. This targeted framework particularly encompasses generative AI algorithms, recommendation algorithms, and other types capable of influencing public opinion or impacting social stability. These requirements place greater compliance obligations on cloud providers, which are now expected to conduct rigorous risk assessments and implement robust governance structures to monitor AI service usage and prevent misuse.
However, the current regulations remain insufficient. As AI technologies continue to integrate more deeply with cloud computing and the AIaaS model gains wider adoption, more targeted legislative measures will be needed. It is anticipated that the Chinese cloud computing regulatory framework will progressively evolve towards greater systematisation and refinement around AI technologies, with more laws and technical standards expected to be issued in the coming years. Future regulations are anticipated to focus on data security, algorithmic transparency, intellectual property protection and industry-specific compliance requirements, providing clearer guidance for cloud computing service providers and aiming to create a more predictable and secure environment for both providers and users of AI-powered cloud services.
10/F, Tower 1
Jing An Kerry Centre
1515 West Nanjing Road
Shanghai 200040
China
+86 21 6019 2600
+86 21 6019 3278
shanghai@tongshang.com www.tongshang.com