Comparison of Old and New Hotel Compliance Standards: Decree No.176 Replacing Decree No.151

Effective October 1, 2026, the Measures for Cyberspace Security Supervision and Inspection of Public Security Organs (Ministry of Public Security Decree No.176) officially comes into force, while the Provisions on Internet Security Supervision and Inspection of Public Security Organs (Ministry of Public Security Decree No.151), issued in 2018, is repealed simultaneously. For accommodation venues including hotels, homestays and serviced apartments, this is more than a mere name change for regulations. Instead, the scope, supervised entities and inspection methods of cybersecurity checks have been further expanded.

In the era of Decree No.151, hotel network compliance largely focused on implementing real-name authentication and retaining internet access logs. With Decree No.176 in effect, hotels need to re-evaluate their entire network environment. Key audit points now cover who accesses the network, what devices connect, what traffic is generated, whether logs can be retrieved, existing network exposure risks, and rapid incident tracing when security breaches occur.

I. Core Changes Between Decree No.151 and Decree No.176

1. Inspection scope expanded from "internet security" to "cyberspace security"

Decree No.151 mainly supervised internet security obligations of internet service providers and internet-connected entities, focusing on network security management, user information and internet access logs.

Decree No.176 extends regulatory oversight to cyberspace security. It explicitly defines supervised parties including network operators, data processors and personal information processors. Inspection content covers network security, data security, personal information protection, cyberattacks and vulnerability remediation.

For hotels, this means network compliance can no longer be simplified as enabling real-name authentication for guest Wi‑Fi. Hotel networks carry multiple services such as guest Wi‑Fi, office systems, PMS, access control, surveillance, TV and screen casting. Any unmanaged network entry point can become a weak link in security management.

2. Shift from "having implemented measures" to "verifiability and traceability"

Under Decree No.151, hotels prioritized whether real-name registration and log retention were in place. Decree No.176 specifies diversified inspection approaches including online patrols, off-site verification, routine inspections and special audits.

This brings a direct shift: hotel networks cannot rely merely on documented policies and configurations. They must deliver practically verifiable security capabilities.

For instance: after guests access Wi‑Fi, can the hotel map network activity to specific identities? When abnormal traffic appears on a terminal, can administrators locate the device and access point? Can historical logs be retrieved quickly? Are there response mechanisms for cyberattacks? These questions matter more than simply having a Portal authentication page.

3. Inspection scope upgraded from single network management to multi-dimensional security capabilities

Decree No.176 mandates checks on compliance with network security, data security and personal information protection obligations. It also verifies technical safeguards against computer viruses, network intrusions, exploits and vulnerability rectification.

Accordingly, hotel network construction evolves from point-based compliance to holistic protection: managing users and endpoints alike; retaining logs while securing network boundaries; enabling business interoperability while preventing unregulated cross-service access.

II. Key Priorities for Hotel Rectification Under New Requirements

1. Real-name authentication must cover more than guest Wi‑Fi

A common compliance practice for hotels is Portal real-name authentication, where guests verify identities via mobile numbers or ID documents before gaining internet access.

However, hotel networks host many non-traditional endpoints besides guest phones and laptops, such as televisions, screen-casting devices, printers, cameras and access controllers, which are not suitable for standard web-page authentication.

Therefore, hotels must manage both human users and devices. For dumb terminals, 802.1X and terminal admission control can be deployed for identity recognition and permission management, avoiding the compliance gap where guest Wi‑Fi is authenticated but internal IoT devices remain unmonitored.

2. Log retention requires retrievability and correlation

Hotel networks generate massive access records daily. The critical requirement is not just storing logs, but the ability to query them during incidents.

Gateways, authentication systems and log audit modules can correlate user identity, access timestamps and network addresses to build a complete traceability chain. This centralized approach simplifies query and administration compared with scattered logs stored separately on multiple devices.

3. Cybersecurity protection cannot rely solely on firewalls

Decree No.176 incorporates cyberattacks, network intrusions and vulnerabilities into inspection scope.

As public internet service providers, hotels must prioritize protection at internet egress points. Beyond basic firewalls, multi-layered defense can be deployed with IPS, WAF and antivirus tools to block malicious attacks, web application risks and anomalous traffic.

Meanwhile, business systems including PMS, OA and financial platforms should not share an open network with guest internet access. Security zones and access controls can restrict unrestricted cross-network access between different services.

III. How AINOPOL Helps Hotels Transition from Basic Compliance to Holistic Protection

To meet compliance requirements while maintaining stable hotel operations and guest experience, AINOPOL delivers unified construction covering network entry, identity authentication, endpoint management, log auditing and security protection.

First, at the internet egress, the Mengxiang M1 gateway integrates routing, firewall, authentication and log audit functions for centralized management of hotel network entry. Portal real-name authentication can be linked with room information and PMS data, granting guests network privileges only after identity verification.

Second, on the endpoint side, the system manages conventional terminals such as mobile phones and PCs, while enabling access control for dumb terminals including TVs, screen casting devices, cameras and access controllers. Terminal authentication, whitelists and network isolation enforce predefined access permissions, mitigating risks from unauthorized device connections.

For hotel screen-casting scenarios, the solution balances guest experience with reasonable network isolation between screen-casting services, Wi‑Fi and television networks. Screen-casting activity logs maintain traceability for device connections and usage. This enables reuse of existing screen-casting hardware without fully interconnecting multiple networks for convenience.

On security defense, AINOPOL integrates firewall, IPS, WAF and antivirus capabilities into the network architecture to build multi-layer protection for internet egress and critical business systems.

After Decree No.176 takes effect, the core of hotel network compliance is no longer just real-name authentication. It requires a complete system covering identity, endpoints, networks, data and security protection.

Hotels still using compliance frameworks designed for Decree No.151 should avoid simply adding an authentication page. Instead, they need to audit hidden network entry points, unmanaged terminals, uncorrelated logs, and the protection level of internet egress and business systems.

The direction of hotel network compliance under Decree No.176 evolves from "internet accessibility" to "verifiable authentication, controllable terminals, auditable records and defendable networks".

FAQ

Q: What new log retention requirements are added by Decree No.176?
A: On top of original internet access logs, three categories of mandatory cybersecurity operational logs are newly required: device operation logs, link operation logs and security operation logs. The total volume of these logs is 5–10 times larger than the requirements under Decree No.151.

Q: What are the differences in inspection modes between Decree No.176 and Decree No.151?
A: Decree No.151 mainly relied on on-site inspections. Decree No.176 grants public security authorities statutory power for online patrols and remote technical detection, forming a three-tier model: online patrol + remote detection + on-site verification. Regulators can preliminarily assess hotel compliance remotely.

Q: Are there new requirements for compliance stakeholders under Decree No.176?
A: Decree No.151 placed security obligations solely on property owners. Decree No.176 introduces shared accountability among three parties: property owners, system integrators and equipment vendors. Regulators will audit whether integrator solutions meet compliance standards and whether vendor hardware satisfies log retention requirements.