Cross-Framework Mapping

FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)vsISO 27001:2022

See exactly how FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls map to ISO 27001:2022. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

32
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
47%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) maps to ISO 27001:2022 with 47% coverage across 15 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 32 FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls identifies 17 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Incident Response and Reporting.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 32 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 32 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Risk Assessment and Safeguard Design(15 mappings)

FTC-314.4bWritten Risk Assessment
ISO27001-A.8.14Processing infrastructure high availability
FTC-314.4c1Access Controls2 targets
ISO27001-A.5.15Logical access governance
ISO27001-A.5.3Separation of conflicting duties
FTC-314.4c3Encryption
ISO27001-A.8.24Cryptographic protection and key management
FTC-314.4c4Secure Development Practices3 targets
ISO27001-A.8.25Security-integrated development lifecycle
ISO27001-A.8.26Application-level security requirements
ISO27001-A.8.29Security validation in development and acceptance
FTC-314.4c5Multi-Factor Authentication4 targets
ISO27001-A.5.15Logical access governance
ISO27001-A.5.17Credential and secret management
ISO27001-A.5.3Separation of conflicting duties
ISO27001-A.8.5Strong authentication mechanisms
FTC-314.4c6Secure Data Disposal
ISO27001-A.8.11Sensitive data obfuscation techniques
FTC-314.4c7Change Management2 targets
ISO27001-A.5.22Supplier performance and change monitoring
ISO27001-A.8.32Controlled change implementation
FTC-314.4c8Monitoring and Logging
ISO27001-A.8.15Audit trail and event logging

Testing, Training, and Oversight(2 mappings)

FTC-314.4dTesting and Monitoring
ISO27001-A.7.4Physical surveillance and monitoring
FTC-314.4e1Security Awareness Training
ISO27001-A.6.3Security awareness and competence programmes

Incident Response and Reporting(3 mappings)

FTC-314.4jFTC Breach Notification3 targets
ISO27001-A.5.24Incident response planning and readiness
ISO27001-A.5.26Incident containment and remediation
ISO27001-A.5.27Post-incident review and improvement

+12 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

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 FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27001:2022?

FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) has 32 controls across its framework, while ISO 27001:2022 covers 95 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 15 overlapping controls (47% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Incident Response and Reporting, where 11 FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct ISO 27001:2022 equivalent.

How many controls map between FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27001:2022?

Of 32 total FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls, 15 map directly to ISO 27001:2022 controls — representing 47% 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 FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) to ISO 27001:2022?

17 FTC Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27001:2022. 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 Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) and ISO 27001:2022?

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.

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.