Australia My Health Records Act 2012vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
See exactly how Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
Australia My Health Records Act 2012 maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 50% coverage across 20 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 40 Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls identifies 20 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Registration and Participation.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 40 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 46 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.
Collection, Use and Disclosure(3 mappings)
Breach and Enforcement(8 mappings)
Governance(2 mappings)
Registration and Participation(7 mappings)
+26 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 868 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
The Australia My Health Records Act 2012 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls your existing Australia My Health Records Act 2012 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
18 of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for Australia My Health Records Act 2012. 88 are genuine gaps.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 50% in the header counts how many Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other Australia My Health Records Act 2012 comparisons
Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 868 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between Australia My Health Records Act 2012 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?
Australia My Health Records Act 2012 has 40 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 20 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Registration and Participation, where 6 Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.
How many controls map between Australia My Health Records Act 2012 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?
Of 40 total Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls, 20 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, representing 50% coverage. The remaining 20 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping Australia My Health Records Act 2012 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?
20 Australia My Health Records Act 2012 controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Registration and Participation 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 Australia My Health Records Act 2012 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?
The domain with the highest gap count is Registration and Participation (6 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
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.