TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

ASIC Cyber Resilience Good PracticesvsIAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)

See exactly how ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices 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.

13
Controls Mapped
9
Gaps Found
36%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices maps to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) with 36% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 22 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices controls identifies 14 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Board and Governance.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 22 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Detect and Respond(9 mappings)

ASIC-CYB-DR-1Continuous Monitoring
→NSS17-5.1Continuous Monitoring
ASIC-CYB-DR-2Incident Response Plan
→NSS17-5.2Incident Response
SWIFT-DET-02Malware Protection3 targets
→NSS17-3.1Computer Security Zones
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security
SWIFT-DET-04Cyber Incident Response4 targets
→NSS17-3.1Computer Security Zones
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
→NSS17-4.3Supply Chain Security
→NSS17-5.2Incident Response

Identify and Protect(2 mappings)

ASIC-CYB-ID-2Access Control
→NSS17-4.1Access Control
ASIC-CYB-ID-4Configuration Management
→NSS17-4.4Configuration Management

Resilience and Recovery(2 mappings)

ASIC-CYB-RES-1Business Continuity Planning
→NSS17-5.2Incident Response
ASIC-CYB-RES-2Recovery Testing
→NSS17-5.3Recovery and Continuity

Related Comparisons

Other ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices comparisons

ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs CSA CCM v413 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 202412 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)12 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)12 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs Defence Security Principles Framework (DSPF)12 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)12 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange12 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs FFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT)12 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 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices has 22 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 8 overlapping controls (36% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Board and Governance, where 4 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices controls have no direct IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) equivalent.

How many controls map between ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

Of 22 total ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices controls, 8 map directly to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls — representing 36% coverage. The remaining 14 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices to IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

14 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices 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 Board and Governance with 4 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 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices and IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Board and Governance (4 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.