TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

42
Controls Mapped
64
Gaps Found
30%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices with 30% coverage across 32 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 74 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 720 frameworks | 432K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 42 mapped controls across 7 domains. Sign up to explore all 432K+ mappings across 720 frameworks.

Govern(4 mappings)

GV.OV-01Risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed2 targets
→ASIC-CR-GOV-1Board engagement and periodic review of cyber strategy
→ASIC-CR-RR-3Proactive board reporting during incidents
GV.OV-02Risk management strategy is reviewed for coverage
→ASIC-CR-GOV-5Responsive, event-driven governance
GV.OV-03Risk management performance is evaluated
→ASIC-CR-GOV-4End-to-end assurance processes

DE - Detect(6 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-02Potentially adverse events are analyzed to better understand associated activities
→ASIC-CR-DE-2Data analytics for threat integration
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-03Information is correlated from multiple sources2 targets
→ASIC-CR-DE-1Continuous monitoring with SIEM
→ASIC-CR-DE-2Data analytics for threat integration
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-07Cyber threat intelligence and contextual information are integrated into analysis
→ASIC-CR-CO-2Specialist threat-intelligence providers
NIST-CSF-DE.CM-01Networks and network services are monitored to find potentially adverse events2 targets
→ASIC-CR-DE-1Continuous monitoring with SIEM
→ASIC-CR-RM-2Fusion centres for real-time monitoring

GV - Govern(8 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01Organizational context for cybersecurity risk management is understood
→ASIC-CR-GOV-6Align cyber governance with enterprise governance
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed upon
→ASIC-CR-GOV-2Treat cyber resilience as a management and investment tool
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→ASIC-CR-GOV-5Responsive, event-driven governance
NIST-CSF-GV.RR-01Organizational leadership is responsible for cybersecurity risk management
→ASIC-CR-GOV-1Board engagement and periodic review of cyber strategy
NIST-CSF-GV.RR-02Roles and responsibilities for cybersecurity risk management are established
→ASIC-CR-GOV-3Board cyber fluency
NIST-CSF-GV.RR-04Cybersecurity is included in human resources practices
→ASIC-CR-GOV-3Board cyber fluency
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-04Suppliers are known and prioritized by criticality
→ASIC-CR-RM-3Third-party and supply chain risk management
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-07Supply chain risk management is verified throughout supplier relationships
→ASIC-CR-RM-3Third-party and supply chain risk management

ID - Identify(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.AM-01Inventories of hardware managed by the organization are maintained
→ASIC-CR-AM-1Centralised asset management system
NIST-CSF-ID.AM-02Inventories of software, services, and systems managed by the organization are maintained
→ASIC-CR-AM-1Centralised asset management system

+22 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 720 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO 27001:202282 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Belgium CyberFundamentals32 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ASEAN Data Management Framework25 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Azure Security Benchmark22 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security22 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)20 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)20 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF)19 mappings

Other ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices comparisons

APRA CPS 234 vs ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices11 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices8 mappingsASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents vs ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices7 mappingsACSC Essential Eight vs ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices1 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 720 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 720 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (432K+)
  • ✓ 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices covers 29 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 32 overlapping controls (30% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 20 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 32 map directly to ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices controls — representing 30% coverage. The remaining 74 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices?

74 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices. The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 20 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (20 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.