FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)vsISO 27018
See exactly how FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls map to ISO 27018. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) maps to ISO 27018 with 31% coverage across 18 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 58 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls identifies 40 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Incident Response and Reporting.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 58 controls analysed | 726 frameworks | 455K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 23 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 455K+ mappings across 726 frameworks.
Incident Response and Reporting(13 mappings)
Purpose, Scope and Definitions(2 mappings)
Safeguard Elements(5 mappings)
+3 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 726 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever — no credit card required
Related Comparisons
Other FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) comparisons
Other ISO 27018 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 726 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 726 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (455K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27018?
FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) has 58 controls across its framework, while ISO 27018 covers 45 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 18 overlapping controls (31% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Incident Response and Reporting, where 6 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct ISO 27018 equivalent.
How many controls map between FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27018?
Of 58 total FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls, 18 map directly to ISO 27018 controls — representing 31% coverage. The remaining 40 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) to ISO 27018?
40 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27018. The highest concentration of gaps is in Incident Response and Reporting with 6 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 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27018?
The domain with the highest gap count is Incident Response and Reporting (6 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
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.