TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsChina Data Security Law (DSL)

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to China Data Security Law (DSL). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

8
Controls Mapped
98
Gaps Found
6%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to China Data Security Law (DSL) with 6% coverage across 6 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 100 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

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

Control Mappings

Showing 8 of 8 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 432K+ mappings across 720 frameworks.

GV - Govern(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed upon
→DSL-Art27Data Security Management System and Whole-Lifecycle Measures (Art. 27)
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→DSL-Art24National Security Review of Data Activities (Art. 24)

ID - Identify(3 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.AM-01Inventories of hardware managed by the organization are maintained
→DSL-Art21Hierarchical Data Classification, Core Data and Important Data Catalogue (Art. 21)
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded2 targets
→DSL-Art22National Data Security Risk Assessment, Monitoring and Early Warning (Art. 22)
→DSL-Art30Important Data Risk Assessment and Reporting (Art. 30)

PR - Protect(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.DS-01The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-at-rest are protected
→DSL-Art27Data Security Management System and Whole-Lifecycle Measures (Art. 27)

RS - Respond(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties2 targets
→DSL-Art23Data Security Emergency Response (Art. 23)
→DSL-Art29Risk Monitoring, Remediation and Incident Notification (Art. 29)

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 ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices32 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 mappings

Other China Data Security Law (DSL) comparisons

China Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) vs China Data Security Law (DSL)3 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs China Data Security Law (DSL)3 mappingsGDPR vs China Data Security Law (DSL)1 mappingsChina Cybersecurity Law (CSL) vs China Data Security Law (DSL)1 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 China Data Security Law (DSL)?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while China Data Security Law (DSL) covers 21 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 6 overlapping controls (6% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 26 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct China Data Security Law (DSL) equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and China Data Security Law (DSL)?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 6 map directly to China Data Security Law (DSL) controls — representing 6% coverage. The remaining 100 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 China Data Security Law (DSL)?

100 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in China Data Security Law (DSL). The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 26 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 China Data Security Law (DSL)?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (26 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.