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
-
How should PCI DSS v4.x requirements noted as superseded by another requirement be reported after 31 March 2025?
-
Are providers of third-party scripts for e-commerce environments considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
Why do requirements 8.3.9 and 8.3.10.1 focus on passwords/passphrases used for single-factor authentication, when multi-factor authentication is required for all access into the CDE?
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 for determining applicability of PCI DSS requirements for assessments documented in a Report on Compliance?
Most Popular
-
How should PCI DSS v4.x requirements noted as superseded by another requirement be reported after 31 March 2025?
-
Are providers of third-party scripts for e-commerce environments considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
Why do requirements 8.3.9 and 8.3.10.1 focus on passwords/passphrases used for single-factor authentication, when multi-factor authentication is required for all access into the CDE?
-
Do PCI DSS Requirements 8.3.9 and 8.3.10.1 apply to all system components?
-
Is the cardholder in scope for PCI DSS?
Most Recently Updated
-
How should PCI DSS v4.x requirements noted as superseded by another requirement be reported after 31 March 2025?
-
Are providers of third-party scripts for e-commerce environments considered third-party service providers for PCI DSS Requirements 12.8 and 12.9?
-
Why do requirements 8.3.9 and 8.3.10.1 focus on passwords/passphrases used for single-factor authentication, when multi-factor authentication is required for all access into the CDE?
-
Do PCI DSS Requirements 8.3.9 and 8.3.10.1 apply to all system components?
-
Is the cardholder in scope for PCI DSS?