TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsSOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

21
Controls Mapped
85
Gaps Found
13%
Coverage

Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination with 13% coverage across 14 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 92 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 878 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 21 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 878 frameworks.

GV - Govern(10 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk management processes3 targets
→SOC-CY-DC1Nature of Business and Operations
→SOC-CY-DC3Cybersecurity Risk Management Objectives
→SOC-CY-DC4Governance Structure
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction that describes appropriate risk response options is established and communicated3 targets
→SOC-CY-DC1Nature of Business and Operations
→SOC-CY-DC3Cybersecurity Risk Management Objectives
→SOC-CY-DC4Governance Structure
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Strategic opportunities (i.e., positive risks) are characterized and are included in organizational cybersecurity risk discussions
→SOC-CY-DC5Risk Assessment Process
NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01A cybersecurity supply chain risk management program, strategy, objectives, policies, and processes are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders3 targets
→SOC-CY-DC1Nature of Business and Operations
→SOC-CY-DC3Cybersecurity Risk Management Objectives
→SOC-CY-DC4Governance Structure

ID - Identify(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans that affect operations are established, communicated, maintained, and improved
→SOC-CY-S2System Operations
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use
→SOC-CY-DC5Risk Assessment Process

PR - Protect(4 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.AA-06Physical access to assets is managed, monitored, and enforced commensurate with risk
→SOC-CY-S1Logical and Physical Access Controls
NIST-CSF-PR.DS-10The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected
→SOC-CY-A1Availability Commitments
NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations
→SOC-CY-A1Availability Commitments
NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained
→SOC-CY-A1Availability Commitments

RC - Recover(3 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed once initiated from the incident response process2 targets
→SOC-CY-A2Disaster Recovery
→SOC-CY-S2System Operations
NIST-CSF-RC.RP-06The end of incident recovery is declared based on criteria, and incident-related documentation is completed
→SOC-CY-A2Disaster Recovery

RS - Respond(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties once an incident is declared
→SOC-CY-S2System Operations

+1 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 878 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

A NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination controls your existing NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 to SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination (built to order)
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
  • Every gap, with what it requires
  • Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number

Why this page shows two different percentages. The 13% in the header counts how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.

A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.

Related Comparisons

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5106 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1104 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs FedRAMP Moderate104 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs FedRAMP High104 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs SOC 2104 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs Australian Information Security Manual103 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO 27001:2022103 mappingsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 vs ISO 27002:2022103 mappings

Other SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination comparisons

SSAE 18 - Attestation Standards (SOC Reporting) vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination10 mappingsTISAX - Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination9 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination9 mappingsSingapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8) vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination9 mappingsSouth Korea ISMS-P vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination9 mappingsAPI 1164 vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination8 mappingsAnnex 11 to EU GMP - Computerised Systems vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination8 mappingsISO/IEC 27019:2024 vs SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination8 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

Cross-framework mappings across 878 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 878 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/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 SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination covers 44 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 14 overlapping controls (13% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 24 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 14 map directly to SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination controls, representing 13% coverage. The remaining 92 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 SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination?

92 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination. 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 SOC for Cybersecurity - Cybersecurity Risk Management Examination?

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.