TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia)vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

See exactly how AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

7
Controls Mapped
32
Gaps Found
8%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 8% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 39 AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) controls identifies 36 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in AML/CTF Program Requirements.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 39 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 330K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 7 of 7 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 330K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Customer Identification (KYC)(2 mappings)

AMLCTF-35Identity Verification Standard2 targets
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-01Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-02Identities are proofed and bound to credentials based on the context of interactions

AML/CTF Program Requirements(5 mappings)

AMLCTF-82Part A Compliance3 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established
→NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
AMLCTF-PartA-RiskAssessML/TF Risk Assessment2 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09Integrity and accuracy of risk assessment results are verified

Related Comparisons

Other AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) comparisons

AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs Bank Secrecy Act / Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML)27 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security3 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs NIST Privacy Framework3 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs MTCS (Singapore)3 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs FedRAMP Rev 53 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements3 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 53 mappingsAML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) vs SSAE 18 - Attestation Standards (SOC Reporting)3 mappings

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

ISO 27001:2022 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.082 mappingsBelgium CyberFundamentals vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASEAN Data Management Framework vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.025 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsAzure Security Benchmark vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsAustralian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 mappingsAWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (330K+)
  • ✓ 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 AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) has 39 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (8% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in AML/CTF Program Requirements, where 9 AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 39 total AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) controls, 3 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls — representing 8% coverage. The remaining 36 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

36 AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in AML/CTF Program Requirements with 9 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 AML/CTF Act 2006 (Australia) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is AML/CTF Program Requirements (9 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.