TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5vsUS OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework

See exactly how NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls map to US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
156
Gaps Found
3%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 maps to US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework with 3% coverage across 6 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 172 NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls identifies 166 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in SC - System and Communications Protection.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 172 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

CA - Assessment, Authorization, and Monitoring(1 mappings)

NIST800-CA-8Penetration testing
→TA-3Remediation of Findings

PS - Personnel Security(4 mappings)

NIST800-PS-8Personnel sanctions4 targets
→MC-1Senior Management Support
→TR-1Periodic Training Program
→TR-2Job-Specific Training
→TR-4Training Updates

RA - Risk Assessment(10 mappings)

NIST800-RA-1Policy and procedures for risk assessment3 targets
→DMF-4.1Impact Assessment
→DMF-4.3Regulatory Risk Assessment
→RA-1Security Risk Assessment
NIST800-RA-2Security categorization4 targets
→DMF-4.1Impact Assessment
→DMF-4.2Risk Categorization
→DMF-4.3Regulatory Risk Assessment
→RA-1Security Risk Assessment
NIST800-RA-5Vulnerability monitoring and scanning3 targets
→DMF-4.1Impact Assessment
→DMF-4.3Regulatory Risk Assessment
→RA-1Security Risk Assessment

SI - System and Information Integrity(1 mappings)

NIST800-SI-2Flaw remediation
→TA-3Remediation of Findings

Related Comparisons

Other NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 comparisons

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange36 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 — Assessing CUI Security Requirements34 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs FedRAMP Rev 534 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs CSA CCM v433 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs PAS 1192-5:2015 — Security-Minded Approach to BIM and Digital Built Environments33 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs Canada ITSG-33 — IT Security Risk Management33 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs New Zealand Information Security Manual (NZISM)33 mappingsNIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 vs MARS-E — Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges33 mappings

Other US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework comparisons

SQF Code Edition 9 — Safe Quality Food vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework10 mappingsILO Nursing Personnel Convention C149 (1977) vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework9 mappingsILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises (MNE Declaration) vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework9 mappingsNIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework8 mappingsNIST AI 600-1 Generative AI Profile vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework8 mappingsChile Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 21.719) vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework8 mappingsEU NIS2 Directive — Transport Sector Requirements vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework8 mappingsFATF Recommendation 16 — Virtual Asset Travel Rule vs US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework8 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 800-53 Rev 5 and US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework?

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 has 172 controls across its framework, while US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework covers 35 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 6 overlapping controls (3% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in SC - System and Communications Protection, where 17 NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls have no direct US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework?

Of 172 total NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls, 6 map directly to US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework controls — representing 3% coverage. The remaining 166 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 to US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework?

166 NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 controls have no direct equivalent in US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework. The highest concentration of gaps is in SC - System and Communications Protection with 17 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 800-53 Rev 5 and US OFAC Sanctions Compliance Framework?

The domain with the highest gap count is SC - System and Communications Protection (17 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.