Cross-Framework Mapping

IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

Name: IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 Control Mapping Dataset
Creator: TheArtOfService

See exactly how IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

Controls Mapped

Gaps Found

73%

Coverage

Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 73% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 11 IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls identifies 3 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in IAEA NSS-17 Physical + Lifecycle + Safety Interface.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 11 controls analysed | 692 frameworks | 306K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 21 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 306K+ mappings across 692 frameworks.

IAEA NSS-17 Access Control(2 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-AccessControl-OT-IT-Authentication-AuthorizationIAEA NSS-17 - Access Control + Authentication + Authorization + IAM + Privileged Access for OT and IT2 targets

→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet the defined incident criteria

→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined in a policy, managed, enforced, and reviewed, and incorporate the principles of least privilege and separation of duties

IAEA NSS-17 Architecture + Zones(2 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-Architecture-Zones-DefenceInDepth-SegmentationIAEA NSS-17 - Computer Security Architecture + Zone Model + Defence in Depth + Network Segmentation + Boundary2 targets

→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet the defined incident criteria

IAEA NSS-17 Assurance + Regulator + Improvement(2 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-Assurance-Regulator-Inspection-Reporting-ImprovementIAEA NSS-17 - Assurance Activities + Regulator Interface + Inspection + Reporting + Information Sharing + Continuous Improvement2 targets

→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-07Cyber threat intelligence and other contextual information are integrated into the analysis

→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-02Cyber threat intelligence is received from information sharing forums and sources

IAEA NSS-17 Detect + IR + Recovery(6 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-Detect-Monitor-Logging-IR-Recovery-ExercisesIAEA NSS-17 - Detection + Monitoring + Logging + Incident Response + Recovery + Computer Security Exercises6 targets

→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans that affect operations are established, communicated, maintained, and improved

→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-04Log records are generated and made available for continuous monitoring

→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed once initiated from the incident response process

→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-06The end of incident recovery is declared based on criteria, and incident-related documentation is completed

→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties once an incident is declared

→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-05The criteria for initiating incident recovery are applied

IAEA NSS-17 Graded Approach + Security Levels + Risk + DBT(2 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-GradedApproach-SecurityLevels-Risk-DBTIAEA NSS-17 - Graded Approach + Computer Security Levels + Risk-Informed Methodology + Threat Assessment + DBT Alignment + Consequence Analysis2 targets

→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Strategic opportunities (i.e., positive risks) are characterized and are included in organizational cybersecurity risk discussions

→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use

IAEA NSS-17 Scope + CSP Establishment(1 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-Scope-NSS-Family-CSP-EstablishmentIAEA NSS-17 + NSS-42-G - Scope + Nuclear Security Series Family + Computer Security Programme Establishment + Roles + Management System Integration

→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-06Physical access to assets is managed, monitored, and enforced commensurate with risk

IAEA NSS-17 Supply Chain + Third Party(5 mappings)

IAEA-NSS17-SupplyChain-ThirdParty-OEM-TrustIAEA NSS-17 - Supply Chain + Third Party + OEM + Vendor Security + Trustworthy Components5 targets

→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet the defined incident criteria

→NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01A cybersecurity supply chain risk management program, strategy, objectives, policies, and processes are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders

→NIST-CSF-ID.AM-04Inventories of services provided by suppliers are maintained

→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed prior to acquisition

+1 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 692 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

A IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls your existing IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)

Not published yet

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 (built to order)

$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 IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 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.

Related Comparisons

Other IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) comparisons

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 692 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

✓ 692 framework browser
✓ Cross-framework mappings (306K+)
✓ 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 →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53 ISO 27001 vs NIST CSF CMMC vs NIST 800-53 FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53 NIST CSF vs SOC 2 HIPAA vs NIST 800-53 ISO 27001 vs SOC 2 ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) has 11 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (73% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in IAEA NSS-17 Physical + Lifecycle + Safety Interface, where 1 IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 11 total IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls, 8 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, representing 73% coverage. The remaining 3 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

3 IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in IAEA NSS-17 Physical + Lifecycle + Safety Interface 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 IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is IAEA NSS-17 Physical + Lifecycle + Safety Interface (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.