HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)vsFedRAMP Rev 5
See exactly how HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls map to FedRAMP Rev 5. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) maps to FedRAMP Rev 5 with 27% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 11 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls identifies 8 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in HKMA C-RAF: Coordination with HKMA SPM TM-G-1, Sectoral Coordination, 2024-2025 Pipeline.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 11 controls analysed | 701 frameworks | 337K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 9 of 9 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 337K+ mappings across 701 frameworks.
HKMA C-RAF Domain 1-2: Governance + Identification (Cyber Strategy, Risk Mgmt, Asset Mgmt, Threat Assessment)(3 mappings)
HKMA C-RAF Domain 3-4: Protection + Detection (Access, Data, Infrastructure, Application, Monitoring, Testing)(4 mappings)
HKMA C-RAF Domain 5-6: Response & Recovery + Situational Awareness (IR, Recovery, Threat Intel, Info Sharing)(2 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons
Other FedRAMP Rev 5 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 701 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 701 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (337K+)
- ✓ 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and FedRAMP Rev 5?
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) has 11 controls across its framework, while FedRAMP Rev 5 covers 12 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (27% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in HKMA C-RAF: Coordination with HKMA SPM TM-G-1, Sectoral Coordination, 2024-2025 Pipeline, where 4 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls have no direct FedRAMP Rev 5 equivalent.
How many controls map between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and FedRAMP Rev 5?
Of 11 total HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls, 3 map directly to FedRAMP Rev 5 controls — representing 27% coverage. The remaining 8 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) to FedRAMP Rev 5?
8 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls have no direct equivalent in FedRAMP Rev 5. The highest concentration of gaps is in HKMA C-RAF: Coordination with HKMA SPM TM-G-1, Sectoral Coordination, 2024-2025 Pipeline with 4 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and FedRAMP Rev 5?
The domain with the highest gap count is HKMA C-RAF: Coordination with HKMA SPM TM-G-1, Sectoral Coordination, 2024-2025 Pipeline (4 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.