Where the recommendation/generation services process personal information through automated decision-making, the Personal Information Protection Law requires transparency and fairness of the decision, prohibits unreasonable differential treatment in trading conditions, and grants individuals the right to an explanation and to refuse decisions made solely by automated means. Referenced here as a cross-cutting obligation of the CAC AI regime; full text not reproduced here.
This control maps to 2 controls across 2 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 2 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.