NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security RequirementsvsUS Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule
See exactly how NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls map to US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements maps to US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule with 11% coverage across 4 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 35 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls identifies 31 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 5 of 5 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
Audit, Assessment, and Monitoring(3 mappings)
Incident Response and Media Protection(2 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements comparisons
Other US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 718 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements and US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule?
NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements has 35 controls across its framework, while US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule covers 4 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 4 overlapping controls (11% 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 US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule equivalent.
How many controls map between NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements and US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule?
Of 35 total NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls, 4 map directly to US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule controls — representing 11% coverage. The remaining 31 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 US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule?
31 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls have no direct equivalent in US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule. 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 US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule?
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
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.