TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

African Union Malabo ConventionvsIAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)

See exactly how African Union Malabo Convention controls map to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

11
Controls Mapped
19
Gaps Found
17%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

African Union Malabo Convention maps to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) with 17% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 30 African Union Malabo Convention controls identifies 25 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Implementation and Final Provisions.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 30 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 11 of 11 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Electronic Transactions(6 mappings)

Art. 2Consent Definition3 targets
→NSS17-3.1Computer Security Zones
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security
Art. 4Participating Institutions3 targets
→NSS17-3.1Computer Security Zones
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security

Cybersecurity Promotion(1 mappings)

Art. 26Outsourcing of Personal Information Processing
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security

Cybercrime Offences(1 mappings)

Art. 28Administrative Measures
→NSS17-6.1Regulatory Requirements

Personal Data Protection — General Principles(3 mappings)

Art. 8Data Categories3 targets
→NSS17-3.1Computer Security Zones
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security

Related Comparisons

Other African Union Malabo Convention comparisons

African Union Malabo Convention vs BS 65000:2014 — Guidance on Organizational Resilience15 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs ILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD6, Directive (EU) 2018/1673)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs ISO 8000 — Data Quality14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs FATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Privacy by Design (PbD) — Seven Foundational Principles14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Iceland Data Protection and Processing of Personal Data Act (Act No. 90/2018)14 mappingsAfrican Union Malabo Convention vs Serbia Law on Personal Data Protection (2018)14 mappings

Other IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) comparisons

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)11 mappingsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)10 mappingsCISA ICS-CERT Advisories and Industrial Control Systems Security Guidelines vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)10 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Rev 3 — Guide to OT Security vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)10 mappingsFedRAMP Rev 5 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)10 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)10 mappingsJapan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)9 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)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 African Union Malabo Convention and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

African Union Malabo Convention has 30 controls across its framework, while IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) covers 22 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (17% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Implementation and Final Provisions, where 6 African Union Malabo Convention controls have no direct IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) equivalent.

How many controls map between African Union Malabo Convention and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

Of 30 total African Union Malabo Convention controls, 5 map directly to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls — representing 17% coverage. The remaining 25 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping African Union Malabo Convention to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

25 African Union Malabo Convention controls have no direct equivalent in IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1). The highest concentration of gaps is in Implementation and Final Provisions with 6 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 African Union Malabo Convention and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Implementation and Final Provisions (6 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.