TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security RequirementsvsNATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production

See exactly how NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls map to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

12
Controls Mapped
23
Gaps Found
14%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements maps to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production with 14% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 35 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls identifies 30 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in System Protection and Communications.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 35 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 12 of 12 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Access Control and Identification(2 mappings)

3.1Physical Security2 targets
→AQAP2110-7Production, Special Processes, Inspection, Testing, and Records
→AQAP2110-8Internal Audit, Management Review, Corrective Action, CofC, and Continual Improvement

Audit, Assessment, and Monitoring(1 mappings)

3.12Segment Data Processing and Storage Based on Sensitivity
→AQAP2110-2Government Quality Assurance Representative (GQAR) Authority and Access

Incident Response and Media Protection(9 mappings)

3.16System and Services Acquisition3 targets
→AQAP2110-1Quality Management System Aligned to ISO 9001 plus NATO Supplementary Requirements
→AQAP2110-2Government Quality Assurance Representative (GQAR) Authority and Access
→AQAP2110-6Subcontractor Supply Chain Control plus Counterfeit Material Prevention
3.17Supply Chain Risk Management3 targets
→AQAP2110-1Quality Management System Aligned to ISO 9001 plus NATO Supplementary Requirements
→AQAP2110-2Government Quality Assurance Representative (GQAR) Authority and Access
→AQAP2110-6Subcontractor Supply Chain Control plus Counterfeit Material Prevention
3.5Securely Dispose of Data3 targets
→AQAP2110-1Quality Management System Aligned to ISO 9001 plus NATO Supplementary Requirements
→AQAP2110-2Government Quality Assurance Representative (GQAR) Authority and Access
→AQAP2110-6Subcontractor Supply Chain Control plus Counterfeit Material Prevention

Related Comparisons

Other NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements comparisons

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security20 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST SP 800-53 Rev 518 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs MTCS (Singapore)17 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST Privacy Framework16 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST SP 800-14615 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST SP 800-14515 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NIST SP 800-14415 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs ISMAP (Japan)15 mappings

Other NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production comparisons

ICH Q10 - Pharmaceutical Quality System vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production6 mappingsICAO Annex 17 - Aviation Security (AVSEC) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsIATF 16949:2016 - Quality Management System for Automotive Production vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsGLOBALG.A.P. Integrated Farm Assurance (IFA) Standard v6 vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsGerman Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsFDA Quality Management System Regulation (QMSR) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsBRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production5 mappingsIMO Maritime Cybersecurity Guidelines (MSC-FAL.1/Circ.3/Rev.2) vs NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production4 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
  • ✓ 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 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements has 35 controls across its framework, while NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production covers 8 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (14% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in System Protection and Communications, where 15 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls have no direct NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

Of 35 total NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls, 5 map directly to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production controls — representing 14% coverage. The remaining 30 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements to NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

30 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls have no direct equivalent in NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production. The highest concentration of gaps is in System Protection and Communications with 15 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 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements and NATO AQAP 2110 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Design, Development, and Production?

The domain with the highest gap count is System Protection and Communications (15 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.