TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board SystemsvsUS Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements

See exactly how IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls map to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

3
Controls Mapped
16
Gaps Found
16%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems maps to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements with 16% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 19 IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls identifies 16 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in IACS UR E26 Survey + Approval.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 19 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 3 of 3 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

IACS UR E26 Protect - Remote + Wireless + Physical(1 mappings)

IACS-UR-E26-Protect-RemoteAccess-Wireless-Physical-BoundaryIACS UR E26 Protect Goal - Remote Access + Wireless + Physical Security + Boundary Protection
→USMTSA-1Facility Security Assessment and Plan

IACS UR E26 Respond + Recover(1 mappings)

IACS-UR-E26-Respond-Recover-IncidentResponse-Recovery-Backup-LessonsIACS UR E26 Respond + Recover Goals - Incident Response + Communication + Recovery + Backup + Lessons Learned
→USMTSA-2Cybersecurity Assessment and CSO Designation

IACS UR E27 Logging + Forensics(1 mappings)

IACS-UR-E27-Logging-Forensics-EventCaptureIACS UR E27 - Equipment Logging + Forensic Readiness + Event Capture + Tamper Detection
→USMTSA-2Cybersecurity Assessment and CSO Designation

Related Comparisons

Other IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems comparisons

IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs OWASP ASVS8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs MITRE D3FEND8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs Azure Security Benchmark8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs BSI IT-Grundschutz8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association)8 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs Ghana Cybersecurity Act8 mappings

Other US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements comparisons

ISO/IEC 27400:2022 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsFedRAMP Rev 5 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsIAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIS2 Directive Implementing Acts vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsISO/IEC 27010:2015 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsUK Gambling Commission - Cyber Resilience Requirements vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
  • ✓ 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 IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems has 19 controls across its framework, while US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements covers 4 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (16% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in IACS UR E26 Survey + Approval, where 1 IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls have no direct US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements equivalent.

How many controls map between IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

Of 19 total IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls, 3 map directly to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements controls — representing 16% coverage. The remaining 16 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

16 IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems controls have no direct equivalent in US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements. The highest concentration of gaps is in IACS UR E26 Survey + Approval 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 IACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

The domain with the highest gap count is IACS UR E26 Survey + Approval (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.