TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST SP 800-146vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

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

15
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
50%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST SP 800-146 maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 50% coverage across 4 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 NIST SP 800-146 controls identifies 4 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Audit, Cost, and Continuous Improvement.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 701 frameworks | 337K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 15 of 15 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 337K+ mappings across 701 frameworks.

Cloud Adoption Strategy(4 mappings)

NISTSP146-1Cloud Adoption Strategy, Workload Suitability, and Decision Framework4 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Opportunities for improvements are identified from risk assessments
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09Integrity and accuracy of risk assessment results are verified
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed

IaaS Operational Posture(1 mappings)

NISTSP146-4IaaS Operational Recommendations and Workload Hardening
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied

Security and Privacy Posture(7 mappings)

NISTSP146-6Cloud Security and Privacy Recommendations7 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-01Identities and credentials for authorized users, services, and hardware are managed
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-02Identities are proofed and bound to credentials based on the context of interactions
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-04Log records are generated and made available for continuous monitoring
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed
→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties

Operational Quality and Portability(3 mappings)

NISTSP146-7Service Level, Performance, Reliability, Interoperability, and Portability3 targets
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-06End-of-recovery is declared based on criteria and documentation
→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-05Criteria for initiating incident recovery are applied

Related Comparisons

Other NIST SP 800-146 comparisons

NIST SP 800-146 vs South Korea ISMS-P4 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs ISO 270184 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs ISO 270194 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs ISO/IEC 27400:20224 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs ISO 270174 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs Singapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8)4 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs IEC 624434 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs API 11644 mappings

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

ISO 27001:2022 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.082 mappingsBelgium CyberFundamentals vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASEAN Data Management Framework vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.025 mappingsAzure Security Benchmark vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsAustralian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 mappingsAWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 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 SP 800-146 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

NIST SP 800-146 has 8 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 4 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Audit, Cost, and Continuous Improvement, where 1 NIST SP 800-146 controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

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

Of 8 total NIST SP 800-146 controls, 4 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls — representing 50% coverage. The remaining 4 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST SP 800-146 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

4 NIST SP 800-146 controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Audit, Cost, and Continuous Improvement with 1 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 SP 800-146 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Audit, Cost, and Continuous Improvement (1 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.