Cross-Framework Mapping

Belgium CyberFundamentalsvsCISA Secure by Design Principles

See exactly how Belgium CyberFundamentals controls map to CISA Secure by Design Principles. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
16
Gaps Found
34%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Belgium CyberFundamentals maps to CISA Secure by Design Principles with 34% coverage across 11 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 32 Belgium CyberFundamentals controls identifies 21 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Belgium CyberFundamentals: Incident Response.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 32 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Belgium CyberFundamentals: Access Control & Identity(4 mappings)

BE-CF-02Access enforcement and least privilege
SBD-1.1Secure by Default Configuration
BE-CF-03Multi-factor authentication requirements3 targets
SBD-1.1Secure by Default Configuration
SBD-1.2Eliminate Default Passwords
SBD-1.3Free Security Features for All Tiers

Belgium CyberFundamentals: System & Communications Protection(2 mappings)

BE-CF-08Cryptographic protection of data2 targets
SBD-1.3Free Security Features for All Tiers
SBD-DEV-04Phishing-Resistant Authentication

Belgium CyberFundamentals: Risk Assessment & Management(4 mappings)

BE-CF-14Vulnerability scanning and management3 targets
SBD-2.4Transparent Security Advisories
SBD-3.3Internal Security Culture
SBD-DEV-07Dependency Management and SBOM
BE-CF-16Threat intelligence integration
SBD-DEV-06Threat Modeling

Belgium CyberFundamentals: Configuration Management(3 mappings)

BE-CF-23Baseline configuration establishment
SBD-1.5Guided Secure Configuration
BE-CF-25Security impact analysis
SBD-1.5Guided Secure Configuration
BE-CF-26System component inventory
SBD-1.5Guided Secure Configuration

Belgium CyberFundamentals: Audit & Accountability(3 mappings)

BE-CF-28Audit event logging and storage
SBD-1.3Free Security Features for All Tiers
BE-CF-29Audit record review and analysis
SBD-1.3Free Security Features for All Tiers
BE-CF-31Audit log protection and retention
SBD-1.3Free Security Features for All Tiers

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 Belgium CyberFundamentals and CISA Secure by Design Principles?

Belgium CyberFundamentals has 32 controls across its framework, while CISA Secure by Design Principles covers 21 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 11 overlapping controls (34% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Belgium CyberFundamentals: Incident Response, where 5 Belgium CyberFundamentals controls have no direct CISA Secure by Design Principles equivalent.

How many controls map between Belgium CyberFundamentals and CISA Secure by Design Principles?

Of 32 total Belgium CyberFundamentals controls, 11 map directly to CISA Secure by Design Principles controls — representing 34% coverage. The remaining 21 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Belgium CyberFundamentals to CISA Secure by Design Principles?

21 Belgium CyberFundamentals controls have no direct equivalent in CISA Secure by Design Principles. The highest concentration of gaps is in Belgium CyberFundamentals: Incident Response 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 Belgium CyberFundamentals and CISA Secure by Design Principles?

The domain with the highest gap count is Belgium CyberFundamentals: Incident Response (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.