TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security RequirementsvsWCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)

See exactly how NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls map to WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

26
Controls Mapped
9
Gaps Found
34%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements maps to WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021) with 34% coverage across 12 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 35 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls identifies 23 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in System Protection and Communications.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 35 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 26 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Access Control and Identification(3 mappings)

3.1Food Safety and Quality Manual
→CTPAT-SCS-03Conveyance and Cargo Security
3.7Identification and Authentication
→CTPAT-SCS-02Personnel Security
3.7.1Multi-Factor Authentication Assessment
→CTPAT-SCS-02Personnel Security

System Protection and Communications(3 mappings)

3.10Physical and Environmental Protection3 targets
→AEO-SC-3Premises Security
→CTPAT-SCS-01Physical Security
→UKTSA-SC-04Third-Party Access Controls

Audit, Assessment, and Monitoring(4 mappings)

3.11Risk Assessment3 targets
→NRF-4Supply Chain Risk Identification
→WCO-SAFE-SCS-01Advance Electronic Information
→WCO-SAFE-SCS-02Risk Management
3.4Internal Audits
→CTPAT-SCS-03Conveyance and Cargo Security

Incident Response and Media Protection(10 mappings)

3.16System and Services Acquisition5 targets
→AEO-SC-4Trading Partner Security
→NRF-4Supply Chain Risk Identification
→NRF-5Third-Party Partner Standards
→NRF-6Vendor Risk Management
→WCO-SAFE-SCS-02Risk Management
3.17Supply Chain Risk Management5 targets
→AEO-SC-4Trading Partner Security
→NRF-4Supply Chain Risk Identification
→NRF-5Third-Party Partner Standards
→NRF-6Vendor Risk Management
→WCO-SAFE-SCS-02Risk Management

+6 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

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 UK Telecommunications (Security) Act 202121 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs South Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP)21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs PAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs Canada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM)21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs NRC 10 CFR 73.54 — Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity21 mappingsNIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange20 mappings

Other WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021) comparisons

WCO Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) Framework vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)12 mappingsPAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsCanada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsNew Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM) vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsMARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsSouth Korea Cloud Security Assurance Program (CSAP) vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsNRC 10 CFR 73.54 — Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)11 mappingsAuthorised Economic Operator (AEO) Programmes — Global Standards vs WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)10 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 693 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
  • ✓ 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 WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)?

NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements has 35 controls across its framework, while WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021) covers 28 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 12 overlapping controls (34% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in System Protection and Communications, where 14 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls have no direct WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021) equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements and WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)?

Of 35 total NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls, 12 map directly to WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021) controls — representing 34% coverage. The remaining 23 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 WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)?

23 NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements controls have no direct equivalent in WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021). The highest concentration of gaps is in System Protection and Communications with 14 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 WCO SAFE Framework of Standards to Secure and Facilitate Global Trade (2021)?

The domain with the highest gap count is System Protection and Communications (14 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.