TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2)vsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)

See exactly how IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls map to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

10
Controls Mapped
2
Gaps Found
58%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) maps to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) with 58% coverage across 7 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 12 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls identifies 5 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Recover.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 12 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 10 of 10 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Identify(5 mappings)

IMO-CY-1.2Cyber Risk Assessment
→CRAF-2.2Risk and Threat Assessment
IMO-CY-1.3Roles and Responsibilities4 targets
→CRAF-1.1Cyber Risk Governance
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
→CRAF-1.4Cyber Risk Roles and Responsibilities
→CRAF-3.6Third-Party Risk Management

Protect(2 mappings)

IMO-CY-2.1Access Control
→CRAF-3.1Access Control
IMO-CY-2.2Awareness and Training
→CRAF-3.5Security Awareness Training

Detect(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-3.1Anomaly Detection
→CRAF-4.4Anomaly Detection

Respond(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-4.1Response Planning
→CRAF-5.3Recovery and Resilience

Recover(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-5.1Recovery Planning
→CRAF-5.3Recovery and Resilience

Related Comparisons

Other IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) comparisons

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements8 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange8 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs CISA ICS-CERT Advisories and Industrial Control Systems Security Guidelines7 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07)7 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs CFTC System Safeguards (17 CFR 37, 38, 39, 49)7 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs CSA CCM v47 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (2023)7 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers7 mappings

Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons

CSA STAR (Security, Trust, Assurance, and Risk) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)15 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)15 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsRBI Cybersecurity Framework for Banks vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsCSA CCM v4 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsASD Information Security Manual (ISM) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsFFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)13 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 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) has 12 controls across its framework, while HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) covers 24 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 7 overlapping controls (58% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Recover, where 1 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls have no direct HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) equivalent.

How many controls map between IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

Of 12 total IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls, 7 map directly to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls — representing 58% coverage. The remaining 5 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

5 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls have no direct equivalent in HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). The highest concentration of gaps is in Recover 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 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Recover (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.