Cross-Framework Mapping

Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF)vsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems

See exactly how Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) controls map to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
23
Gaps Found
31%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) maps to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems with 31% coverage across 12 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 39 Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) controls identifies 27 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Risk Management.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 39 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Asset, Change, and Configuration Management(2 mappings)

AESCSF-ACM-1Asset Inventory
E26-R1Asset inventory
AESCSF-ACM-2Configuration Management
E27-R1System hardening

Identity and Access Management(2 mappings)

AESCSF-IAM-2Access Control
E26-R5Access control
AESCSF-IAM-3Multi-Factor Authentication
E27-R3User authentication

Event and Incident Response(6 mappings)

AESCSF-IR-1Incident Response Plan2 targets
E26-R13Incident response plan
E27-R5Security event logging
AESCSF-IR-2Incident Response Capability2 targets
E26-R13Incident response plan
E27-R5Security event logging
AESCSF-IR-3Incident Reporting2 targets
E26-R13Incident response plan
E27-R5Security event logging

Situational Awareness and Event Management(2 mappings)

AESCSF-SA-1Logging and Monitoring2 targets
E26-R11Logging and audit trail
E27-R5Security event logging

Threat and Vulnerability Management(1 mappings)

AESCSF-TVM-1Vulnerability Assessment
E26-R3Risk assessment

Risk Management(3 mappings)

CDP-RM-1Risk Identification Process
E26-R3Risk assessment
CDP-RM-3Value Chain Risk Assessment
E26-R3Risk assessment
GAMP5-1.2Patient Safety Risk Assessment
E26-R3Risk assessment

Related Comparisons

Other Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) comparisons

Other IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems comparisons

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 →

What are the key differences between Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) has 39 controls across its framework, while IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems covers 22 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 12 overlapping controls (31% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Risk Management, where 13 Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) controls have no direct IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems equivalent.

How many controls map between Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

Of 39 total Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) controls, 12 map directly to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls — representing 31% coverage. The remaining 27 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

27 Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) controls have no direct equivalent in IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems. The highest concentration of gaps is in Risk Management with 13 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 Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

The domain with the highest gap count is Risk Management (13 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.