TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment ModelvsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

See exactly how Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
15
Gaps Found
13%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 13% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 31 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model controls identifies 44 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Software Engineering.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 31 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Acquisition Process Group(3 mappings)

ACQ.4Supplier Monitoring3 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→NIST-CSF-ID.AM-04Inventories of services provided by suppliers are maintained
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed on the basis of their risk

Management, Acquisition, and Validation(3 mappings)

ACQ.4Supplier Monitoring3 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→NIST-CSF-ID.AM-04Inventories of services provided by suppliers are maintained
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed on the basis of their risk

Machine Learning Engineering (v4.0 new)(4 mappings)

MLE.1Machine Learning Requirements Analysis2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed
MLE.3Machine Learning Training2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed

Hardware and Machine Learning Engineering(4 mappings)

MLE.1Machine Learning Requirements Analysis2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed
MLE.3Machine Learning Training2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed

Support Process Group(1 mappings)

SUP.8Configuration Management
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied

Support Processes (SUP)(1 mappings)

SUP.8Configuration Management
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied

Related Comparisons

Other Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model comparisons

Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)5 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs ISO/IEC 23894:20235 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs Annex 11 to EU GMP - Computerised Systems4 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements4 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs AS9100D - Aerospace Quality Management System4 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs ISO/IEC 27003:20174 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs AS9100D:2016 - Quality Management Systems for Aviation, Space, and Defence4 mappingsAutomotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model vs UK Gambling Commission - Cyber Resilience Requirements3 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 (332K+)
  • ✓ 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 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model has 31 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (13% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Software Engineering, where 6 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 31 total Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model controls, 8 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls — representing 13% coverage. The remaining 44 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

44 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Software Engineering 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 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE) v4.0 - Process Assessment Model and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Software Engineering (6 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.