TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsO-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

18
Controls Mapped
85
Gaps Found
13%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) with 13% coverage across 13 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 103 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 90 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

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

Control Mappings

Showing 18 of 18 mapped controls across 4 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 analysis
→ORAN-SEC-1.1Threat Modeling and Remediation
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria3 targets
→ORAN-SEC-2.1Interface Security Requirements
→ORAN-SEC-3.1TLS Implementation
→ORAN-SEC-4.1Security Test Specifications

GV - Govern(3 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk
→ORAN-SEC-1.2Risk Management
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established
→ORAN-SEC-1.2Risk Management
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→ORAN-SEC-1.2Risk Management

ID - Identify(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.RA-02Cyber threat intelligence is received from information sharing forums
→ORAN-SEC-1.1Threat Modeling and Remediation

PR - Protect(10 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.AA-01Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed
→ORAN-SEC-2.1Interface Security Requirements
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-02Identities are proofed and bound to credentials based on the context of interactions
→ORAN-SEC-2.1Interface Security Requirements
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed4 targets
→ORAN-SEC-2.1Interface Security Requirements
→ORAN-SEC-2.3Least Privilege and Zero Trust
→ORAN-SEC-3.1TLS Implementation
→ORAN-SEC-4.1Security Test Specifications
NIST-CSF-PR.DS-10The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected
→ORAN-SEC-2.2Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations
→ORAN-SEC-2.2Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained
→ORAN-SEC-2.2Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated throughout the SDLC
→ORAN-SEC-5.2Application Security

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 HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)20 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 mappings

Other O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) comparisons

CSA CCM v4 vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)9 mappingsASD Information Security Manual (ISM) vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)9 mappingsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)9 mappingsISO 27001:2022 vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)8 mappingsCSA STAR (Security, Trust, Assurance, and Risk) vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)8 mappingsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)8 mappingsSingapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8) vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)8 mappingsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) vs O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)8 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 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 103 controls across its framework, while O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) covers 13 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 13 overlapping controls (13% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 25 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)?

Of 103 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 13 map directly to O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls — representing 13% coverage. The remaining 90 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 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)?

90 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11). The highest concentration of gaps is in GV - Govern with 25 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 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)?

The domain with the highest gap count is GV - Govern (25 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.