TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Iowa Consumer Data Protection ActvsNIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)

See exactly how Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act controls map to NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

11
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
50%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act maps to NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) with 50% coverage across 4 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act controls identifies 4 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Iowa CDPA Coordination.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 11 of 11 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Iowa CDPA Consumer Rights(2 mappings)

ICDPA-ConsumerRights-Access-Delete-Portability-OptOut-Sale-Appeal-90Day-NO-Right-To-Correction-Authorised-AgentIowa CDPA Consumer Rights - Access + Delete + Portability + Opt-Out of Sale + 90-Day Response + Appeal + Authorised Agent + NO Right to Correction + NO Profiling Opt-Out + Free First Per Year2 targets
→171A-IR-01Assess Incident Handling
→171A-IR-02Assess Incident Response Testing

Iowa CDPA Controller Obligations(3 mappings)

ICDPA-Controller-PrivacyNotice-PurposeLimitation-DataMinimisation-Sale-Disclosure-Transparency-LawfulBasisIowa CDPA Controller Obligations - Privacy Notice + Purpose Limitation + Data Minimisation + Sale Disclosure Statement + Targeted Advertising Disclosure + Privacy by Design + Lawful Processing3 targets
→171A-AC-02Assess Access Enforcement
→171A-AC-04Assess Separation of Duties
→171A-AC-06Assess Remote Access Controls

Iowa CDPA Enforcement + Penalties(2 mappings)

ICDPA-Enforcement-90DayCure-AttorneyGeneralOnly-NoPrivateRight-CivilPenalties-7500-PerViolation-Longest-CureIowa CDPA Enforcement - Attorney General Exclusive + 90-Day Cure Period (LONGEST among US State Privacy Laws) + No Private Right of Action + Civil Penalties Up to USD 7500 Per Violation2 targets
→171A-IR-01Assess Incident Handling
→171A-IR-02Assess Incident Response Testing

Iowa CDPA Sensitive Data + Children(4 mappings)

ICDPA-SensitiveData-Notice-OptOut-NotConsent-Children-COPPA-Alignment-De-IdentificationIowa CDPA Sensitive Data + Notice + Opt-Out (NOT Consent unlike VCDPA) + Children Under 13 + COPPA Alignment + De-Identification Standards + Heightened Risk Awareness4 targets
→171A-AC-07Assess Wireless Access Controls
→171A-MP-01Assess Media Protection
→171A-SC-02Assess Cryptographic Protection
→171A-SC-03Assess Communications Protection

Related Comparisons

Other Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act comparisons

Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Privacy Act 1988 (Australia)7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos Personales (LOPDP)7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Law No. 172-13 on the Protection of Personal Data7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Bahrain PDPL7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Federal Decree-Law No. 45 of 2021 on the Protection of Personal Data (UAE PDPL)7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Iceland Data Protection and Processing of Personal Data Act (Act No. 90/2018)7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs Indiana Consumer Data Protection Act7 mappingsIowa Consumer Data Protection Act vs APPI7 mappings

Other NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) comparisons

NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)22 mappingsNIST Privacy Framework vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)21 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)20 mappingsAWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)20 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)20 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)20 mappingsSLSA vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)19 mappingsSIG (Shared Assessments) vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)19 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 Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act and NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)?

Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act has 8 controls across its framework, while NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) covers 32 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 4 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Iowa CDPA Coordination, where 1 Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act controls have no direct NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) equivalent.

How many controls map between Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act and NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)?

Of 8 total Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act controls, 4 map directly to NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) controls — representing 50% coverage. The remaining 4 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act to NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)?

4 Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act controls have no direct equivalent in NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). The highest concentration of gaps is in Iowa CDPA Coordination 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 Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act and NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Iowa CDPA Coordination (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.