TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global StandardsvsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)

See exactly how Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards controls map to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

15
Controls Mapped
3
Gaps Found
33%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards maps to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) with 33% coverage across 6 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 18 Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards controls identifies 12 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Pillar 2 — Customs-to-Business Partnerships.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 18 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 15 of 15 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

AEO Eligibility and Compliance Criteria(7 mappings)

AEO-2Financial Viability3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management
AEO-4Supply Chain Security3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management
AEO-5Personnel Security
→DSPF-INFO-3Information Access Controls

Pillar 1 — Customs-to-Customs Network Arrangements(5 mappings)

P1-S1Advance Electronic Information2 targets
→38.1051(a)General Security Requirements for DCMs
→39.18(a)General Security Requirements for DCOs
P1-S2Risk Management3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-4ICT and Security Risks Within the Risk Management System
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management

Pillar 2 — Customs-to-Business Partnerships(3 mappings)

P2-S1Partnership Programme3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management

Related Comparisons

Other Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards comparisons

Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs WCO Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Framework8 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)8 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs Singapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8)8 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements7 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20217 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (SOCI)7 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs Defence Security Principles Framework (DSPF)7 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 20247 mappings

Other EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) comparisons

Defence Security Principles Framework (DSPF) vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)22 mappingsCSA CCM v4 vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)21 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)21 mappingsProtective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 2024 vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)21 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)21 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)21 mappingsEBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07) vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)20 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)20 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 Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards has 18 controls across its framework, while EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) covers 50 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 6 overlapping controls (33% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Pillar 2 — Customs-to-Business Partnerships, where 5 Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards controls have no direct EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) equivalent.

How many controls map between Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

Of 18 total Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards controls, 6 map directly to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls — representing 33% coverage. The remaining 12 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

12 Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards controls have no direct equivalent in EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023). The highest concentration of gaps is in Pillar 2 — Customs-to-Business Partnerships with 5 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 Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Pillar 2 — Customs-to-Business Partnerships (5 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.