Cross-Framework Mapping

NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

See exactly how NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

173
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
83%
Coverage

Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 83% coverage across 54 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 65 NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls identifies 11 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Administrative.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 65 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 173 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

Administrative(20 mappings)

164.308(a)(1)(i)Security Management Process (Standard)6 targets
NIST-CSF-GV.PO-01Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is established based on organizational context, cybersecurity strategy, and priorities and is communicated and enforced
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders
NIST-CSF-GV.RR-02Roles, responsibilities, and authorities related to cybersecurity risk management are established, communicated, understood, and enforced
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-06Risk responses are chosen, prioritized, planned, tracked, and communicated
NIST-CSF-RS.MI-01Incidents are contained
NIST-CSF-RS.MI-02Incidents are eradicated
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A)Risk Analysis (Required)10 targets
NIST-CSF-DE.AE-07Cyber threat intelligence and other contextual information are integrated into the analysis
NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01The organizational mission is understood and informs cybersecurity risk management
NIST-CSF-GV.OV-02The cybersecurity risk management strategy is reviewed and adjusted to ensure coverage of organizational requirements and risks
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-06A standardized method for calculating, documenting, categorizing, and prioritizing cybersecurity risks is established and communicated
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Strategic opportunities (i.e., positive risks) are characterized and are included in organizational cybersecurity risk discussions
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-03Internal and external threats to the organization are identified and recorded
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-04Potential impacts and likelihoods of threats exploiting vulnerabilities are identified and recorded
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-05Threats, vulnerabilities, likelihoods, and impacts are used to understand inherent risk and inform risk response prioritization
NIST-CSF-ID.RA-10Critical suppliers are assessed prior to acquisition
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(B)Risk Management (Required)4 targets
NIST-CSF-GV.OV-02The cybersecurity risk management strategy is reviewed and adjusted to ensure coverage of organizational requirements and risks
NIST-CSF-GV.OV-03Organizational cybersecurity risk management performance is evaluated and reviewed for adjustments needed
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01Risk management objectives are established and agreed to by organizational stakeholders
NIST-CSF-GV.RM-02Risk appetite and risk tolerance statements are established, communicated, and maintained

+153 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 686 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

A NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls your existing NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2
Not published yet

This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.

If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.

NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 (built to order)
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
  • Every gap, with what it requires
  • Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number

Why this page shows two different percentages. The 83% in the header counts how many NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.

A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 686 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (310K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/month

Professional

  • Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • Unlimited full-text search
  • Framework self-assessment
  • PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 has 65 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 54 overlapping controls (83% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Administrative, where 8 NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 65 total NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls, 54 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, representing 83% coverage. The remaining 11 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

11 NIST SP 800-66 Rev 2 controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Administrative with 8 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 800-66 Rev 2 and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Administrative (8 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.