IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)vsJapan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions
See exactly how IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls map to Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) maps to Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions with 41% coverage across 9 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 22 IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls identifies 13 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Computer Security Architecture.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 22 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 19 of 19 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.
Risk Assessment and Management(6 mappings)
Computer Security Architecture(2 mappings)
Protective Measures(5 mappings)
Monitoring, Response and Recovery(4 mappings)
Competent Authority Responsibilities(2 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) comparisons
Other Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 693 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
- ✓ 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 IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions?
IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) has 22 controls across its framework, while Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions covers 19 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 9 overlapping controls (41% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Computer Security Architecture, where 3 IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls have no direct Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions equivalent.
How many controls map between IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions?
Of 22 total IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls, 9 map directly to Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions controls — representing 41% coverage. The remaining 13 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) to Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions?
13 IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls have no direct equivalent in Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions. The highest concentration of gaps is in Computer Security Architecture with 3 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 IAEA Nuclear Security Series — Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and Japan FSA Cybersecurity Guidelines for Financial Institutions?
The domain with the highest gap count is Computer Security Architecture (3 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.