NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) SecurityvsAPRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
See exactly how NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security controls map to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security maps to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management with 38% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security controls identifies 5 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in OT Supply Chain, Lifecycle, Physical.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 10 of 10 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
OT Security Program Governance(3 mappings)
OT Risk Assessment(4 mappings)
OT Incident Response and Recovery(3 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security comparisons
Other APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management 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 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security has 8 controls across its framework, while APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management covers 47 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (38% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in OT Supply Chain, Lifecycle, Physical, where 1 NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security controls have no direct APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management equivalent.
How many controls map between NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
Of 8 total NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security controls, 3 map directly to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management controls — representing 38% coverage. The remaining 5 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security to APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
5 NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security controls have no direct equivalent in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. The highest concentration of gaps is in OT Supply Chain, Lifecycle, Physical with 1 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 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security and APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management?
The domain with the highest gap count is OT Supply Chain, Lifecycle, Physical (1 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.