Cross-Framework Mapping

Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity RequirementsvsIRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management)

See exactly how Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements controls map to IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

6
Controls Mapped
2
Gaps Found
38%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements maps to IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management) with 38% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements controls identifies 5 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Data Protection and Vendor.

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

Control Mappings

Showing 6 of 6 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Scope and Applicability(2 mappings)

NGCB-1Regulation 5.260 Scope, Applicability, and Licensee Categories2 targets
IRM-Process-Identification-Analysis-Evaluation-Treatment-Monitoring-Review-ISO31000-AlignedIRM Risk Management Process - 5-Stage Cycle + Identification + Analysis (Inherent/Residual) + Evaluation + Treatment (4Ts Tolerate/Treat/Transfer/Terminate) + Monitoring + Review + Communication + Risk Register
IRM-RiskCategories-Strategic-Financial-Operational-Knowledge-FOIL-External-Internal-DownsideUpsideIRM Four Risk Categories - Strategic + Financial + Operational + Knowledge + FOIL Typology + External vs Internal + Downside Threats and Upside Opportunities + Risk Universe

Technical Controls(2 mappings)

NGCB-5Technical Security Controls - Access + Network + Encryption + Vulnerability + Logging2 targets
IRM-Process-Identification-Analysis-Evaluation-Treatment-Monitoring-Review-ISO31000-AlignedIRM Risk Management Process - 5-Stage Cycle + Identification + Analysis (Inherent/Residual) + Evaluation + Treatment (4Ts Tolerate/Treat/Transfer/Terminate) + Monitoring + Review + Communication + Risk Register
IRM-RiskCategories-Strategic-Financial-Operational-Knowledge-FOIL-External-Internal-DownsideUpsideIRM Four Risk Categories - Strategic + Financial + Operational + Knowledge + FOIL Typology + External vs Internal + Downside Threats and Upside Opportunities + Risk Universe

Audit and Oversight(2 mappings)

NGCB-8Annual Independent Cybersecurity Assessment + Reporting + Board Oversight2 targets
IRM-Process-Identification-Analysis-Evaluation-Treatment-Monitoring-Review-ISO31000-AlignedIRM Risk Management Process - 5-Stage Cycle + Identification + Analysis (Inherent/Residual) + Evaluation + Treatment (4Ts Tolerate/Treat/Transfer/Terminate) + Monitoring + Review + Communication + Risk Register
IRM-RiskCategories-Strategic-Financial-Operational-Knowledge-FOIL-External-Internal-DownsideUpsideIRM Four Risk Categories - Strategic + Financial + Operational + Knowledge + FOIL Typology + External vs Internal + Downside Threats and Upside Opportunities + Risk Universe

Related Comparisons

Other Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements comparisons

Other IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management) comparisons

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 →

What are the key differences between Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements and IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management)?

Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements has 8 controls across its framework, while IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management) covers 7 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (38% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Data Protection and Vendor, where 1 Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements controls have no direct IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management) equivalent.

How many controls map between Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements and IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management)?

Of 8 total Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements controls, 3 map directly to IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management) controls — representing 38% 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 Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements to IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management)?

5 Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements controls have no direct equivalent in IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management). The highest concentration of gaps is in Data Protection and Vendor 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 Nevada Gaming Control Board Cybersecurity Requirements and IRM Enterprise Risk Management Framework (Institute of Risk Management)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Data Protection and Vendor (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.