TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

ITIL 4vsIAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)

See exactly how ITIL 4 controls map to IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

3
Controls Mapped
50
Gaps Found
6%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ITIL 4 maps to IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) with 6% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 53 ITIL 4 controls identifies 50 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in ITIL 4: Service Strategy & Design.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 53 controls analysed | 706 frameworks | 324K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 3 of 3 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 324K+ mappings across 706 frameworks.

ITIL 4: Service Transition(1 mappings)

ITIL4-10Configuration management
→IAEA-NSS17-SystemIntegrity-Configuration-Change-ManagementIAEA NSS-17 - System Integrity + Configuration Management + Change Management + Baseline + Hardening

ITIL 4: Service Operation(2 mappings)

ITIL4-11Incident management
→IAEA-NSS17-Detect-Monitor-Logging-IR-Recovery-ExercisesIAEA NSS-17 - Detection + Monitoring + Logging + Incident Response + Recovery + Computer Security Exercises
ITIL4-15Access management for services
→IAEA-NSS17-AccessControl-OT-IT-Authentication-AuthorizationIAEA NSS-17 - Access Control + Authentication + Authorization + IAM + Privileged Access for OT and IT

Related Comparisons

Other ITIL 4 comparisons

ITIL 4 vs NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security5 mappingsITIL 4 vs ISO 20000-15 mappingsITIL 4 vs ISO 27001:20225 mappingsITIL 4 vs NIST Privacy Framework4 mappingsITIL 4 vs MTCS (Singapore)4 mappingsITIL 4 vs FFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT)4 mappingsITIL 4 vs SOC 24 mappingsITIL 4 vs NIS2 Directive4 mappings

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

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)8 mappingsISO/IEC 27400:2022 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)7 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)7 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)7 mappingsOWASP Top 10:2025 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)6 mappingsOWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)6 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)6 mappingsISO/IEC 27011:2024 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)6 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 706 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 706 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (324K+)
  • ✓ 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 ITIL 4 and IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

ITIL 4 has 53 controls across its framework, while IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) covers 11 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (6% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in ITIL 4: Service Strategy & Design, where 5 ITIL 4 controls have no direct IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) equivalent.

How many controls map between ITIL 4 and IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

Of 53 total ITIL 4 controls, 3 map directly to IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1) controls — representing 6% coverage. The remaining 50 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ITIL 4 to IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

50 ITIL 4 controls have no direct equivalent in IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1). The highest concentration of gaps is in ITIL 4: Service Strategy & Design with 5 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 ITIL 4 and IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)?

The domain with the highest gap count is ITIL 4: Service Strategy & Design (5 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.