Frequently Asked Question

Can the "Compliant but with Legal exception" option in the AOC be used to identify where a testing procedure could not be performed due to a legal constraint?
No. The "Compliant but with Legal exception" option in Part 3 of an Attestation of Compliance (AOC) allows an entity to document that they could not implement one or more requirements because doing so would contravene a local or regional law or regulation. In such circumstances, the requirements that cannot be met must be marked as "Not in Place" in the accompanying ROC (Report on Compliance) or SAQ (Self-Assessment Questionnaire), as applicable. Use of the "Compliant but with Legal exception" option also requires additional review from the acquirer or payment brand to whom compliance is being reported.
Where the assessor is unable to complete testing of a requirement because of a legal constraint-for example, due to government enforced travel restrictions, local or regional lockdowns, or other factors impacting the assessor's ability to gain access or complete a testing activity-the affected requirements must be marked as 'Not Tested'. Because the assessor was unable to determine whether the requirement has been met, Part 3 of the AOC must be marked as 'Non-Compliant.'
In situations where testing procedures cannot be completed, assessors are encouraged to document in the report why the requirement could not be tested, and entities encouraged to consult with their acquirer and/or payment brand to understand expectations regarding partial or incomplete assessments.
Related
-
Are Approved Scanning Vendors and Qualified Security Assessors considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
What are the expectations for entities when assigning risk rankings to vulnerabilities and resolving or addressing those vulnerabilities?
-
Is phishing-resistant authentication alone acceptable as multi-factor authentication for PCI DSS Requirements 8.4.1 and 8.4.3?
Featured FAQ Articles
Featured
-
Do PCI DSS requirements for keyed cryptographic hashing apply to previously hashed PANs?
-
Is the PCI DSS Attestation of Compliance intended to be shared?
-
How does an entity report the results of a PCI DSS assessment for new requirements that are noted in PCI DSS as best practices until a future date?
-
Where do I direct questions about complying with PCI standards?
-
Can SAQ eligibility criteria be used as a guide for determining applicability of PCI DSS requirements for merchant assessments documented in a Report on Compliance?
Most Popular
-
Are Approved Scanning Vendors and Qualified Security Assessors considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
What are the expectations for entities when assigning risk rankings to vulnerabilities and resolving or addressing those vulnerabilities?
-
Is phishing-resistant authentication alone acceptable as multi-factor authentication for PCI DSS Requirements 8.4.1 and 8.4.3?
-
Are passkeys synced across devices, implemented according to the FIDO2 requirements, acceptable for use as phishing-resistant authentication to meet PCI DSS Requirement 8.4.2?
-
How should PCI DSS v4.x requirements noted as superseded by another requirement be reported after 31 March 2025?
Most Recently Updated
-
Are Approved Scanning Vendors and Qualified Security Assessors considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
Can a compensating control be used for requirements with a periodic or defined frequency, where an entity did not perform the activity within the required timeframe?
-
How often must service providers test penetration testing segmentation controls under PCI DSS?
-
Are merchants allowed to request card-verification codes/values from cardholders?
-
What is the maximum period of time that cardholder data can be stored?