TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)vsSOC 2

See exactly how FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls map to SOC 2. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

23
Controls Mapped
13
Gaps Found
25%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) maps to SOC 2 with 25% coverage across 9 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 36 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls identifies 27 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Incident Response and Reporting.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 36 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 23 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Incident Response and Reporting(14 mappings)

FTC-314.4jFTC Breach Notification2 targets
→SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
→SOC2-CC7.5Identifies the root cause of security incidents
LLOYDS-IR-01Incident Response Plan4 targets
→SOC2-A1.2Environmental protections, data backups, and recovery infrastructure support availability
→SOC2-A1.3Recovery plan procedures support system recovery from failures
→SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
→SOC2-CC7.5Identifies the root cause of security incidents
LLOYDS-IR-03Resilience and Recovery3 targets
→SOC2-A1.1Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments
→SOC2-A1.2Environmental protections, data backups, and recovery infrastructure support availability
→SOC2-A1.3Recovery plan procedures support system recovery from failures
NGC-5.260(i)Patron and Employee Data Protection3 targets
→SOC2-P3.1Personal information is collected consistent with privacy commitments
→SOC2-P4.3Personal information is securely disposed of
→SOC2-P6.1Personal information is disclosed to third parties only as committed
Sec. 314.4(h)Incident response plan2 targets
→SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
→SOC2-CC7.5Identifies the root cause of security incidents

Purpose, Scope and Definitions(6 mappings)

Sec. 314.2(a)Definition of financial institution2 targets
→SOC2-CC4.2COSO principle 17: Evaluates and communicates deficiencies in a timely manner
→SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
Sec. 314.2(b)Definition of customer information4 targets
→SOC2-CC4.2COSO principle 17: Evaluates and communicates deficiencies in a timely manner
→SOC2-CC7.4Responds to identified security incidents through defined procedures
→SOC2-P3.1Personal information is collected consistent with privacy commitments
→SOC2-P4.3Personal information is securely disposed of

+3 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 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) comparisons

FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)22 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs CSA CCM v420 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange20 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) — Higher Education Safeguards Rule19 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)19 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs PAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments19 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs Canada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management19 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM)19 mappings

Other SOC 2 comparisons

TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs SOC 213 mappingsSSAE 18 — Attestation Standards (SOC Reporting) vs SOC 213 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs SOC 212 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs SOC 212 mappingsCSA CCM v4 vs SOC 211 mappingsEU Digital Markets Act vs SOC 211 mappingsFedRAMP Rev 5 vs SOC 211 mappingsAustralia Consumer Data Right — Banking (CDR) vs SOC 211 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 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and SOC 2?

FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) has 36 controls across its framework, while SOC 2 covers 54 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 9 overlapping controls (25% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Incident Response and Reporting, where 11 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct SOC 2 equivalent.

How many controls map between FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and SOC 2?

Of 36 total FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls, 9 map directly to SOC 2 controls — representing 25% coverage. The remaining 27 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 SOC 2?

27 FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct equivalent in SOC 2. The highest concentration of gaps is in Incident Response and Reporting with 11 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 SOC 2?

The domain with the highest gap count is Incident Response and Reporting (11 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.