TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO/IEC 29147:2018vsUS Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements

See exactly how ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls map to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

1
Controls Mapped
39
Gaps Found
2%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO/IEC 29147:2018 maps to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements with 2% coverage across 1 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 40 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls identifies 47 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 40 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 1 of 1 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Clause 1-4: Introduction(1 mappings)

30111-3Terms and definitions
→USMTSA-2Cybersecurity Assessment and CSO Designation

Related Comparisons

Other ISO/IEC 29147:2018 comparisons

ISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)8 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs NIST SP 800-1467 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs NIST SP 800-1457 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs NIST SP 800-1447 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs MTCS (Singapore)7 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs ISMAP (Japan)7 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)7 mappingsISO/IEC 29147:2018 vs FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)7 mappings

Other US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements comparisons

ISO/IEC 27400:2022 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsFedRAMP Rev 5 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsIACS Unified Requirements E26/E27 - Cyber Resilience of Ships and On-Board Systems vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsIAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIS2 Directive Implementing Acts vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 mappingsISO/IEC 27010:2015 vs US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements2 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 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

ISO/IEC 29147:2018 has 40 controls across its framework, while US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements covers 4 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 1 overlapping controls (2% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts, where 8 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

Of 40 total ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls, 1 map directly to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements controls — representing 2% coverage. The remaining 47 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 29147:2018 to US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

47 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls have no direct equivalent in US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts with 8 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 ISO/IEC 29147:2018 and US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) and USCG Cybersecurity Requirements?

The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 5: Vulnerability Disclosure Concepts (8 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.