TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

See exactly how CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

131
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
97%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 97% coverage across 38 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 39 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls identifies 1 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in CFTC System Safeguards: Registrant Specific Requirements.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 39 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 131 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.

CFTC System Safeguards: Risk Analysis and Oversight Program(20 mappings)

CFTC-SS-1Program of Risk Analysis and Oversight4 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.OV-01Cybersecurity risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed to inform and adjust strategy and direction
→NIST-CSF-GV.PO-01Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is established based on organizational context, cybersecurity strategy, and priorities and is communicated and enforced
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-05Threats, vulnerabilities, likelihoods, and impacts are used to understand inherent risk and inform risk response prioritization
CFTC-SS-12Capacity and Performance Planning Category2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.CM-09Computing hardware and software, runtime environments, and their data are monitored to find potentially adverse events
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained
CFTC-SS-2Enterprise Risk Management and Governance Category5 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.OV-01Cybersecurity risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed to inform and adjust strategy and direction
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk management processes
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction that describes appropriate risk response options is established and communicated
→NIST-CSF-GV.RR-02Roles, responsibilities, and authorities related to cybersecurity risk management are established, communicated, understood, and enforced
CFTC-SS-22Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planning Category3 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-01Improvements are identified from evaluations
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans that affect operations are established, communicated, maintained, and improved
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations
CFTC-SS-23Resources Sufficient to Fulfil Obligations3 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.OC-04Critical objectives, capabilities, and services that external stakeholders depend on or expect from the organization are understood and communicated
→NIST-CSF-GV.RR-03Adequate resources are allocated commensurate with the cybersecurity risk strategy, roles, responsibilities, and policies
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained
CFTC-SS-3Information Security Category3 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.CM-01Networks and network services are monitored to find potentially adverse events
→NIST-CSF-DE.CM-03Personnel activity and technology usage are monitored to find potentially adverse events
→NIST-CSF-GV.RR-04Cybersecurity is included in human resources practices

+111 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 868 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

The CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls your existing CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

Coverage does not run both ways. CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 lands at 29.2%, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) lands at 71.8%, on the same two control sets. That is not a rounding difference. It is the whole reason these are two separate reports: one asks what your CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) evidence buys you for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0, the other asks the reverse.

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
29.2%

31 of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49). 75 are genuine gaps.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)
71.8%

28 of 39 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls are evidenced by work you have already done for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. 11 are genuine gaps.

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
  • Every gap, with what it requires
  • Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number

Why this page shows two different percentages. The 97% in the header counts how many CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.

A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.

Related Comparisons

Other CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) comparisons

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs FedRAMP High39 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs FedRAMP Moderate39 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs C5 (Germany)38 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs NIST SP 800-161 Rev 138 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.136 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 535 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs DORA35 mappingsCFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs SOC 233 mappings

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0106 mappingsCloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0104 mappingsFedRAMP Moderate vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0104 mappingsFedRAMP High vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0104 mappingsSOC 2 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0104 mappingsAustralian Information Security Manual vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0103 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0103 mappingsISO 27002:2022 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0103 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 868 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/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 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) has 39 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 38 overlapping controls (97% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in CFTC System Safeguards: Registrant Specific Requirements, where 1 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 39 total CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls, 38 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, representing 97% coverage. The remaining 1 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

1 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in CFTC System Safeguards: Registrant Specific Requirements with 1 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 CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is CFTC System Safeguards: Registrant Specific Requirements (1 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.