Skip to content
DCC · DATA COMPLIANCE CHINA China data law, for overseas counsel.
§ TAG · AUTOMATED-DECISION-MAKING

Filed under automated-decision-making

Every brief tagged "automated-decision-making".

  • § 01 · ENFORCEMENT

    CVERC Names 82 Apps for PI Violations, and 28 From Its August Batch Are Now Off the Stores

    On 23 September 2026 the National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center (国家计算机病毒应急处理中心, CVERC) named 82 mobile apps whose collection and use of personal information failed its testing, carried out between 29 July and 4 September under the 2026 CAC + MIIT + MPS joint special campaign. The notice is published as text, and DCC translates it in full: twelve violation categories, 118 findings, and every app, consolidated into one table. Three things set it apart from the MIIT and CAC notices in DCC's tracker. First, a published retest loop: of the 75 apps CVERC named in August, 28 still failed on retest and have been taken down by the distribution platforms. Second, the taxonomy has moved past the 2019 Identification Method into PIPL's statutory text. Five categories track PIPL Articles 23, 24, 30, 31 and 51 almost word for word: separate consent for sharing with another handler, an opt-out from automated-decision push, notice of why sensitive personal information is needed, dedicated rules for children under 14, and security measures. Third, the perimeter: 29 mini-programs on WeChat, Baidu and Alipay, three WeChat service accounts, two TV apps, a standalone ad SDK, and twelve builds downloaded from third-party download sites. Eight hospital channels are named, among them United Family Healthcare's mini-program, and hospitals account for four of the eleven findings of sharing personal information without separate consent.

    enforcement · cverc · app-compliance
  • § 02 · AI-GOVERNANCE

    AI Agents and the Limits of Consent — When 'Authorisation' Stops Being One Click

    Li Wenlong (科技利维坦) takes the Doubao phone assistant — an AI that 'reads your screen' and acts across apps — and asks whether the consent/authorisation mechanism that traditional data law leans on can survive the agent era. His four challenges: the app-bounded 'private' environment dissolves as data and permissions move across apps (with Nissenbaum's Contextual Integrity as the only real conceptual anchor, and far from operational); agents that *act* (not just retrieve) push informed consent past the point of failure already reached by personalised ads; purpose limitation collapses because an agent chooses its own path, means and decisions from a low-information instruction, edging into automated decision-making; and ultra vires agency shifts liability from user to platform, with China's 'hallucination case' and the Air Canada case as the only thin precedents. For overseas counsel building or advising on agentic AI in China: a map of why 'authorisation' is becoming a problem of agency, system control, liability allocation and autonomy — not a checkbox — and why transparency is now a prerequisite, not a feature.

    ai-governance · ai-agents · pipl
§ SUBSCRIBE

The Monday brief.

One short email every Monday. New briefs on Chinese data-compliance rules from the previous week, with the source law cited.

Opt-in only. Unsubscribe anytime by replying "unsubscribe" to any issue.

SUPPORT DCC

Keep the publication free to read. Suggested support is $19.99, or choose your own amount.

Support →