Cross-Framework Mapping

BCBS 239vsFTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)

See exactly how BCBS 239 controls map to FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

20
Controls Mapped
5
Gaps Found
40%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

BCBS 239 maps to FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) with 40% coverage across 10 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 25 BCBS 239 controls identifies 15 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in BCBS 239: Information Security Governance.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 25 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 20 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

BCBS 239: Cybersecurity Controls(2 mappings)

BCBS239-08Application security controls
FTC-314.4c4Secure Development Practices
BCBS239-09Encryption and key management
FTC-314.4c3Encryption

BCBS 239: Operational Resilience(9 mappings)

BCBS239-11Business continuity planning and testing
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery
BCBS239-12Disaster recovery procedures2 targets
LLOYDS-IR-01Incident Response Plan
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery
BCBS239-13Third-party dependency management2 targets
FTC-314.4bWritten Risk Assessment
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery
BCBS239-14Critical service identification2 targets
FTC-314.4bWritten Risk Assessment
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery
BCBS239-15Communication and escalation procedures2 targets
FTC-314.4bWritten Risk Assessment
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery

BCBS 239: Incident Management & Reporting(9 mappings)

BCBS239-22Incident response and containment3 targets
FTC-314.4jFTC Breach Notification
LLOYDS-IR-01Incident Response Plan
Sec. 314.4(h)Incident response plan
BCBS239-24Customer notification procedures3 targets
FTC-314.4jFTC Breach Notification
LLOYDS-IR-01Incident Response Plan
Sec. 314.4(h)Incident response plan
BCBS239-25Post-incident review and improvement3 targets
FTC-314.4jFTC Breach Notification
LLOYDS-IR-01Incident Response Plan
Sec. 314.4(h)Incident response plan

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 BCBS 239 and FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

BCBS 239 has 25 controls across its framework, while FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) covers 32 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 10 overlapping controls (40% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in BCBS 239: Information Security Governance, where 5 BCBS 239 controls have no direct FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) equivalent.

How many controls map between BCBS 239 and FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

Of 25 total BCBS 239 controls, 10 map directly to FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls — representing 40% coverage. The remaining 15 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping BCBS 239 to FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

15 BCBS 239 controls have no direct equivalent in FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314). The highest concentration of gaps is in BCBS 239: Information Security Governance 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 BCBS 239 and FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

The domain with the highest gap count is BCBS 239: Information Security Governance (5 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.