TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018)vsUNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)

See exactly how Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) controls map to UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

25
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
42%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) maps to UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005) with 42% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 19 Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) controls identifies 11 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Part V — Remedies and Sanctions.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 19 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 25 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Part IV — Supervisory Authority (AZOP)(10 mappings)

Art. 10Consent Requirements3 targets
→Art. 2Consent Definition
→Art. 7Minimum Standards
→Art. 9Free Data Sharing
Art. 8Data Categories4 targets
→Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 17Governance Structure
→Art. 2Consent Definition
→Art. 4Participating Institutions
Art. 9Free Data Sharing3 targets
→Art. 10Consent Requirements
→Art. 2Consent Definition
→Art. 7Minimum Standards

Part V — Remedies and Sanctions(1 mappings)

Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 8Data Categories

Part III — Video Surveillance(2 mappings)

Art. 19Consent Management Controls2 targets
→Art. 12Data Ownership
→Art. 8Data Categories

Part I — General Provisions(6 mappings)

Art. 2Consent Definition6 targets
→Art. 10Consent Requirements
→Art. 17Governance Structure
→Art. 4Participating Institutions
→Art. 7Minimum Standards
→Art. 8Data Categories
→Art. 9Free Data Sharing

Part II — Special Categories of Data Processing(1 mappings)

Art. 4Participating Institutions
→Art. 17Governance Structure

+5 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) comparisons

Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs ILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977)9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673)9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs ISO 8000 — Data Quality9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs Privacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs Hungary Act CXII of 2011 on Informational Self-Determination and Freedom of Information (Info Act)9 mappingsAct on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) vs Brazil Open Finance (Resolução Conjunta No. 1/2020)9 mappings

Other UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005) comparisons

BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)10 mappingsILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappings6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappingsJordan Draft Personal Data Protection Law (2022) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappingsHungary Act CXII of 2011 on Informational Self-Determination and Freedom of Information (Info Act) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappingsZimbabwe Data Protection Act (2021) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappingsBrazil Open Finance (Resolução Conjunta No. 1/2020) vs UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)9 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/month

Professional

  • ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • ✓ Unlimited full-text search
  • ✓ Framework self-assessment
  • ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) and UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)?

Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) has 19 controls across its framework, while UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005) covers 18 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (42% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Part V — Remedies and Sanctions, where 3 Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) controls have no direct UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005) equivalent.

How many controls map between Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) and UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)?

Of 19 total Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) controls, 8 map directly to UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005) controls — representing 42% coverage. The remaining 11 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) to UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)?

11 Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) controls have no direct equivalent in UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005). The highest concentration of gaps is in Part V — Remedies and Sanctions with 3 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.

Which control domains have the most gaps between Act on the Implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (OG 42/2018) and UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce (1996, updated 2005)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Part V — Remedies and Sanctions (3 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.