TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2)vsUK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers

See exactly how IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls map to UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

8
Controls Mapped
4
Gaps Found
58%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) maps to UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers 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 8 of 8 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Identify(3 mappings)

IMO-CY-1.2Cyber Risk Assessment2 targets
→A.2Risk Assessment
→CRP-1Cyber Risk Profile Assessment
IMO-CY-1.3Roles and Responsibilities
→A.4Supply Chain Risk Management

Protect(2 mappings)

IMO-CY-2.1Access Control
→B.1Access Control
IMO-CY-2.2Awareness and Training
→A.5Security Training and Awareness

Detect(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-3.1Anomaly Detection
→C.1Security Monitoring

Respond(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-4.1Response Planning
→D.3Backup and Recovery

Recover(1 mappings)

IMO-CY-5.1Recovery Planning
→D.3Backup and Recovery

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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)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 mappings

Other UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers comparisons

CSA CCM v4 vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers16 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsSouth Korea ISMS-P vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsPAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsCanada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsNew Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers15 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 UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers?

IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) has 12 controls across its framework, while UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers covers 21 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 UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers equivalent.

How many controls map between IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) and UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers?

Of 12 total IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls, 7 map directly to UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers 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 UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers?

5 IMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) controls have no direct equivalent in UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers. 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 UK Defence Standard 05-138 — Cyber Security for Defence Suppliers?

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.