Cross-Framework Mapping

FedRAMP Rev 5vsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems

See exactly how FedRAMP Rev 5 controls map to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

35
Controls Mapped
29
Gaps Found
36%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

FedRAMP Rev 5 maps to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems with 36% coverage across 23 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 64 FedRAMP Rev 5 controls identifies 41 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Access Control and Authentication.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 64 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 35 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

System Protection and Communications(9 mappings)

3.10Physical and Environmental Protection2 targets
E26-R5Access control
E26-R7Physical security of systems
FEDRAMP-CM-1Configuration Management Policy
E27-R1System hardening
FEDRAMP-CM-2Baseline Configuration
E27-R1System hardening
FEDRAMP-CP-9System Backup2 targets
E26-R15Recovery planning
E26-R16Backup and restoration
FEDRAMP-SC-13Cryptographic Protection
E26-R6Secure remote access
FEDRAMP-SC-28Protection of Information at Rest
E26-R6Secure remote access
FEDRAMP-SC-8Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
E26-R6Secure remote access

Access Control and Authentication(7 mappings)

CJIS-5Identification and Authentication
E27-R3User authentication
ICS-AC-1Role-based access control
E26-R5Access control
ICS-AC-2Authentication mechanisms
E27-R3User authentication
ICS-AC-4Physical access controls2 targets
E26-R5Access control
E26-R7Physical security of systems
NIS2-IA-11Access Control Policy
E26-R5Access control
NIS2-IA-12Multi-Factor Authentication
E27-R3User authentication

Audit, Assessment and Risk(4 mappings)

FEDRAMP-AU-2Event Logging2 targets
E26-R11Logging and audit trail
E27-R5Security event logging
FEDRAMP-AU-3Content of Audit Records2 targets
E26-R11Logging and audit trail
E27-R5Security event logging

+15 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 FedRAMP Rev 5 comparisons

Other IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems comparisons

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 FedRAMP Rev 5 and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

FedRAMP Rev 5 has 64 controls across its framework, while IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems covers 22 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 23 overlapping controls (36% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Access Control and Authentication, where 13 FedRAMP Rev 5 controls have no direct IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems equivalent.

How many controls map between FedRAMP Rev 5 and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

Of 64 total FedRAMP Rev 5 controls, 23 map directly to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls — representing 36% coverage. The remaining 41 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping FedRAMP Rev 5 to IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

41 FedRAMP Rev 5 controls have no direct equivalent in IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems. The highest concentration of gaps is in Access Control and Authentication with 13 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 FedRAMP Rev 5 and IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 — Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems?

The domain with the highest gap count is Access Control and Authentication (13 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.