TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

35
Controls Mapped
68
Gaps Found
19%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) with 19% coverage across 20 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 103 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 83 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 103 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 35 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

DE - Detect(4 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-07Cyber threat intelligence and contextual information are integrated into analysis2 targets
→CRAF-4.2Threat Intelligence
→CRAF-6.1Cyber Threat Landscape Monitoring
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria2 targets
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
→CRAF-1.4Cyber Risk Roles and Responsibilities

GV - Govern(10 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk3 targets
→CRAF-1.1Cyber Risk Governance
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
→CRAF-3.6Third-Party Risk Management
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established3 targets
→CRAF-1.1Cyber Risk Governance
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
→CRAF-3.6Third-Party Risk Management
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→CRAF-2.2Risk and Threat Assessment
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established3 targets
→CRAF-1.1Cyber Risk Governance
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
→CRAF-3.6Third-Party Risk Management

ID - Identify(5 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained2 targets
→CRAF-5.1Incident Response Planning
→CRAF-5.2Incident Response Execution
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-02Cyber threat intelligence is received from information sharing forums2 targets
→CRAF-4.2Threat Intelligence
→CRAF-6.1Cyber Threat Landscape Monitoring
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09Integrity and accuracy of risk assessment results are verified
→CRAF-2.2Risk and Threat Assessment

PR - Protect(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed
→CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy

+15 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 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 NIST SP 800-82 Rev 3 — Guide to OT Security22 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange21 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs CSA CCM v421 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO 27001:202220 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)20 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA) Cyber Risk Management Code of Conduct19 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs FAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation19 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs FedRAMP Rev 519 mappings

Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons

CSA STAR (Security, Trust, Assurance, and Risk) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)15 mappingsFAA Cybersecurity Framework for Aviation vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)15 mappingsRBI Cybersecurity Framework for Banks vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsCSA CCM v4 vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsASD Information Security Manual (ISM) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)14 mappingsFFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)13 mappingsAustralian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) vs HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)13 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 103 controls across its framework, while HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) covers 24 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 20 overlapping controls (19% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 24 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

Of 103 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 20 map directly to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls — representing 19% coverage. The remaining 83 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

83 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 24 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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (24 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.