TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)vsResponsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process

See exactly how EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls map to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
34
Gaps Found
12%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) maps to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process with 12% coverage across 6 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 50 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls identifies 44 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Information Security.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 50 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Information Security(10 mappings)

38.1051(a)General Security Requirements for DCMs3 targets
→RMI-DD-2Supply Chain Information Collection
→RMI-SEG-2Environmental Standards
→RMI-SEG-3OHS and Governance
39.18(a)General Security Requirements for DCOs3 targets
→RMI-DD-2Supply Chain Information Collection
→RMI-SEG-2Environmental Standards
→RMI-SEG-3OHS and Governance
GLI33-4.2Penetration Testing
→RMI-DD-4Due Diligence Reporting
TISAX-IS-03Third-Party Risk Management3 targets
→RMI-DD-3Red Flag Review
→RMI-MS-2Cobalt Standard
→RMI-RMAP-2Risk-Based Audit Approach

ICT Operations and Change Management(3 mappings)

EIOPA-GL-19ICT Third-Party Risk Management3 targets
→RMI-DD-3Red Flag Review
→RMI-MS-2Cobalt Standard
→RMI-RMAP-2Risk-Based Audit Approach

Business Continuity Management(3 mappings)

EIOPA-GL-25Outsourcing of ICT Services3 targets
→RMI-DD-3Red Flag Review
→RMI-MS-2Cobalt Standard
→RMI-RMAP-2Risk-Based Audit Approach

Related Comparisons

Other EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) comparisons

EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs Defence Security Principles Framework (DSPF)22 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs CSA CCM v421 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)21 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 202421 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)21 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange21 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07)20 mappingsEIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) vs FAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation20 mappings

Other Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process comparisons

CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49) vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsGLI-33 — Gaming Laboratories International Event Wagering Systems vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsTelecommunications Sector Security Reforms (TSSR) vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsDefence Security Principles Framework (DSPF) vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsProtective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 2024 vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 mappingsAustralian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) vs Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process7 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 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?

EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) has 50 controls across its framework, while Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process covers 14 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 6 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Information Security, where 29 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls have no direct Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process equivalent.

How many controls map between EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?

Of 50 total EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls, 6 map directly to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process controls — representing 12% 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 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) to Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?

44 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) controls have no direct equivalent in Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process. The highest concentration of gaps is in Information Security with 29 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 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023) and Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) — Responsible Minerals Assurance Process?

The domain with the highest gap count is Information Security (29 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.