TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsNIST SP 800-146

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to NIST SP 800-146. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

15
Controls Mapped
91
Gaps Found
12%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to NIST SP 800-146 with 12% coverage across 13 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 93 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 701 frameworks | 337K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 15 of 15 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 337K+ mappings across 701 frameworks.

DE - Detect(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NISTSP146-1Cloud Adoption Strategy, Workload Suitability, and Decision Framework

GV - Govern(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→NISTSP146-1Cloud Adoption Strategy, Workload Suitability, and Decision Framework

ID - Identify(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09Integrity and accuracy of risk assessment results are verified
→NISTSP146-1Cloud Adoption Strategy, Workload Suitability, and Decision Framework

PR - Protect(6 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.AA-01Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-02Identities are proofed and bound to credentials based on the context of interactions
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed2 targets
→NISTSP146-1Cloud Adoption Strategy, Workload Suitability, and Decision Framework
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied
→NISTSP146-4IaaS Operational Recommendations and Workload Hardening
NIST-CSF-PR.PS-04Log records are generated and made available for continuous monitoring
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations

RC - Recover(3 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed2 targets
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
→NISTSP146-7Service Level, Performance, Reliability, Interoperability, and Portability
NIST-CSF-RC.RP-06End-of-recovery is declared based on criteria and documentation
→NISTSP146-7Service Level, Performance, Reliability, Interoperability, and Portability

RS - Respond(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties
→NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations
NIST-CSF-RS.MA-05Criteria for initiating incident recovery are applied
→NISTSP146-7Service Level, Performance, Reliability, Interoperability, and Portability

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 Australian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF)19 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association)19 mappings

Other NIST SP 800-146 comparisons

South Korea ISMS-P vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsISO 27018 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsISO 27019 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsISO/IEC 27400:2022 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsISO 27017 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsSingapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8) vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsIEC 62443 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappingsAPI 1164 vs NIST SP 800-1464 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 701 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 701 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (337K+)
  • ✓ 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 NIST SP 800-146?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while NIST SP 800-146 covers 8 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 13 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 27 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct NIST SP 800-146 equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and NIST SP 800-146?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 13 map directly to NIST SP 800-146 controls — representing 12% coverage. The remaining 93 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 NIST SP 800-146?

93 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in NIST SP 800-146. The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 27 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 NIST SP 800-146?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (27 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.