TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192)vsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)

See exactly how Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) controls map to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

34
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
39%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) maps to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) with 39% coverage across 11 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 28 Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) controls identifies 17 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Supply Chain Security.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 28 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 34 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Supply Chain Security(20 mappings)

AEO-SC-3Premises Security4 targets
→DSPF-INFO-3Information Access Controls
→EIOPA-GL-8Logical Security
→EIOPA-GL-9Physical Security
→TISAX-IS-01ISMS Requirements
AEO-SC-4Trading Partner Security3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management
CTPAT-SCS-01Physical Security2 targets
→EIOPA-GL-9Physical Security
→TISAX-IS-01ISMS Requirements
CTPAT-SCS-02Personnel Security2 targets
→DSPF-INFO-3Information Access Controls
→EIOPA-GL-13Information Security Training and Awareness
NRF-4Supply Chain Risk Identification5 targets
→38.1051(a)General Security Requirements for DCMs
→39.18(a)General Security Requirements for DCOs
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management
NRF-5Third-Party Partner Standards3 targets
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services
→TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management
NRF-6Vendor Risk Management
→EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management

+14 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) comparisons

Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements12 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07)11 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)11 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs NIST SP 800-82 Rev 3 — Guide to OT Security11 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs NIS2 Directive Implementing Acts11 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs NIST Privacy Framework 1.011 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs FedRAMP Rev 511 mappingsCritical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) vs WCO Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Framework11 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 Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) has 28 controls across its framework, while EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) covers 50 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 11 overlapping controls (39% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Supply Chain Security, where 15 Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) controls have no direct EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) equivalent.

How many controls map between Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

Of 28 total Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) controls, 11 map directly to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls — representing 39% coverage. The remaining 17 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) to EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

17 Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) controls have no direct equivalent in EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023). The highest concentration of gaps is in Supply Chain Security with 15 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 Critical Raw Materials Act (Proposed Regulation COM(2023) 192) and EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Supply Chain Security (15 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.