TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

HL7 FHIR Security FrameworkvsCSA CCM v4

See exactly how HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls map to CSA CCM v4. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

40
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
85%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

HL7 FHIR Security Framework maps to CSA CCM v4 with 85% coverage across 11 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 13 HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls identifies 2 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Audit and Provenance.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 13 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 40 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Authorization and Access Control(19 mappings)

A01:2025Broken Access Control4 targets
→CSA-IAM-01Identity and access management policy and procedures
→CSA-IAM-05Least privilege
→CSA-IAM-11CSC authorization to tenant and service component provisioning
→CSA-IAM-16Authorization mechanisms
A02:2025Security Misconfiguration9 targets
→CSA-CCC-04Unauthorized change protection
→CSA-CCC-08Exception management
→CSA-CEK-01Encryption and key management policy
→CSA-CEK-18Key archival
→CSA-IAM-02Strong password policy and procedures
→CSA-IAM-14Strong authentication
→CSA-IAM-15Passwords management
→CSA-IVS-04OS hardening and base controls
→CSA-LOG-10Encryption monitoring and reporting
FHIR-SEC-3.2Consent-Based Access Control3 targets
→CSA-IAM-01Identity and access management policy and procedures
→CSA-IAM-11CSC authorization to tenant and service component provisioning
→CSA-IAM-16Authorization mechanisms
FHIR-SEC-3.3Scope-Based Authorization3 targets
→CSA-IAM-05Least privilege
→CSA-IAM-11CSC authorization to tenant and service component provisioning
→CSA-IAM-16Authorization mechanisms

Communications Security(1 mappings)

FHIR-SEC-1.1Transport Layer Security
→CSA-CEK-01Encryption and key management policy

+20 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 HL7 FHIR Security Framework comparisons

HL7 FHIR Security Framework vs Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA)11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs ETSI EN 303 64511 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs CISA Zero Trust Maturity Model11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs Spain ENS11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs Belgium CyberFundamentals11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs BSIMM11 mappingsHL7 FHIR Security Framework vs ANSSI Cybersecurity Framework11 mappings

Other CSA CCM v4 comparisons

TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs CSA CCM v446 mappingsPAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments vs CSA CCM v443 mappingsNew Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) vs CSA CCM v443 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs CSA CCM v443 mappingsOman National Cybersecurity Framework vs CSA CCM v443 mappingsNIST Privacy Framework 1.0 vs CSA CCM v442 mappingsCanada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management vs CSA CCM v442 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs CSA CCM v442 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 HL7 FHIR Security Framework and CSA CCM v4?

HL7 FHIR Security Framework has 13 controls across its framework, while CSA CCM v4 covers 171 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 11 overlapping controls (85% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Audit and Provenance, where 1 HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls have no direct CSA CCM v4 equivalent.

How many controls map between HL7 FHIR Security Framework and CSA CCM v4?

Of 13 total HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls, 11 map directly to CSA CCM v4 controls — representing 85% coverage. The remaining 2 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping HL7 FHIR Security Framework to CSA CCM v4?

2 HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls have no direct equivalent in CSA CCM v4. The highest concentration of gaps is in Audit and Provenance with 1 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 HL7 FHIR Security Framework and CSA CCM v4?

The domain with the highest gap count is Audit and Provenance (1 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.