Cross-Framework Mapping

HIPAA Security RulevsCMMC 2.0

See exactly how HIPAA Security Rule controls map to CMMC 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

153
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
73%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which CMMC 2.0 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

HIPAA Security Rule maps to CMMC 2.0 with 73% coverage across 49 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 67 HIPAA Security Rule controls identifies 18 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Administrative.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 67 controls analysed | 878 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 153 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 878 frameworks.

Administrative(20 mappings)

164.306Security Standards: General Rules7 targets
→AC.L2-3.1.5Least Privilege
→AT.L2-3.2.1Role-Based Risk Awareness
→AT.L2-3.2.2Role-Based Training
→CA.L2-3.12.1Security Control Assessment
→RA.L2-3.11.1Risk Assessments
→SC.L2-3.13.8Data in Transit
→SI.L2-3.14.2Malicious Code Protection
164.308(a)(1)(i)Security Management Process (Standard)
→CA.L2-3.12.1Security Control Assessment
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A)Risk Analysis (Required)5 targets
→CM.L2-3.4.4Security Impact Analysis
→CM.L2-3.4.9User-Installed Software
→RA.L2-3.11.1Risk Assessments
→RA.L2-3.11.2Vulnerability Scan
→SI.L2-3.14.3Security Alerts & Advisories
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(B)Risk Management (Required)5 targets
→CA.L2-3.12.2Plan of Action
→CA.L2-3.12.3Security Control Monitoring
→MA.L2-3.7.2System Maintenance Control
→RA.L2-3.11.3Vulnerability Remediation
→SI.L2-3.14.1Flaw Remediation
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(D)Information System Activity Review (Required)2 targets
→AU.L2-3.3.3Event Review
→AU.L2-3.3.5Audit Correlation

+133 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 878 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

The HIPAA Security Rule to CMMC 2.0 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which CMMC 2.0 controls your existing HIPAA Security Rule work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

Coverage does not run both ways. HIPAA Security Rule into CMMC 2.0 lands at 37.3%, while CMMC 2.0 into HIPAA Security Rule lands at 49.3%, on the same two control sets. That is not a rounding difference. It is the whole reason these are two separate reports: one asks what your HIPAA Security Rule evidence buys you for CMMC 2.0, the other asks the reverse.

HIPAA Security Rule into CMMC 2.0
37.3%

41 of 110 CMMC 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for HIPAA Security Rule. 69 are genuine gaps.

CMMC 2.0 into HIPAA Security Rule
49.3%

33 of 67 HIPAA Security Rule controls are evidenced by work you have already done for CMMC 2.0. 34 are genuine gaps.

HIPAA Security Rule to CMMC 2.0
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
  • Every gap, with what it requires
  • Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number

Why this page shows two different percentages. The 73% in the header counts how many HIPAA Security Rule controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many CMMC 2.0 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.

A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

Cross-framework mappings across 878 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 878 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/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 HIPAA Security Rule and CMMC 2.0?

HIPAA Security Rule has 67 controls across its framework, while CMMC 2.0 covers 110 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 49 overlapping controls (73% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Administrative, where 9 HIPAA Security Rule controls have no direct CMMC 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between HIPAA Security Rule and CMMC 2.0?

Of 67 total HIPAA Security Rule controls, 49 map directly to CMMC 2.0 controls, representing 73% coverage. The remaining 18 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping HIPAA Security Rule to CMMC 2.0?

18 HIPAA Security Rule controls have no direct equivalent in CMMC 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Administrative with 9 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 HIPAA Security Rule and CMMC 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Administrative (9 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.