TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0vsUK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021

See exactly how NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls map to UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

15
Controls Mapped
91
Gaps Found
10%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps to UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021 with 10% coverage across 11 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls identifies 95 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in GV - Govern.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 704 frameworks | 357K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 15 of 15 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 357K+ mappings across 704 frameworks.

DE - Detect(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→UK-TSA-NET-01Security Architecture

GV - Govern(1 mappings)

NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→UK-TSA-NET-03Supply Chain Security

ID - Identify(4 mappings)

NIST-CSF-ID.AM-04Inventories of services provided by suppliers are maintained
→UK-TSA-NET-03Supply Chain Security
NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained2 targets
→UK-TSA-MON-02Incident Notification
→UKTSA-SD-04Security Incident Response
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed on the basis of their risk
→UK-TSA-NET-03Supply Chain Security

PR - Protect(5 mappings)

NIST-CSF-PR.AA-01Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed
→UK-TSA-NET-02Access Control and Authentication
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-02Identities are proofed and bound to credentials based on the context of interactions
→UK-TSA-NET-02Access Control and Authentication
NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed2 targets
→UK-TSA-NET-01Security Architecture
→UK-TSA-NET-02Access Control and Authentication
NIST-CSF-PR.PS-04Log records are generated and made available for continuous monitoring
→UK-TSA-MON-01Security Monitoring

RC - Recover(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed2 targets
→UK-TSA-MON-02Incident Notification
→UKTSA-SD-04Security Incident Response

RS - Respond(2 mappings)

NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties2 targets
→UK-TSA-MON-02Incident Notification
→UKTSA-SD-04Security Incident Response

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 UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021 comparisons

NIS2 Directive vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsRBI Cybersecurity Framework for Banks vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsOWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsSouth Korea ISMS-P vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsSingapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8) vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 20216 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 704 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 704 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (357K+)
  • ✓ 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 UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021?

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 has 106 controls across its framework, while UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021 covers 33 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 11 overlapping controls (10% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in GV - Govern, where 27 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021 equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021?

Of 106 total NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, 11 map directly to UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021 controls — representing 10% coverage. The remaining 95 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 UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021?

95 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021. 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 UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021?

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.