Cross-Framework Mapping

O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11)vsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)

See exactly how O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls map to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

17
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
62%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) maps to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) with 62% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 13 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls identifies 5 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Security Protocols (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 3).

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 13 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 17 of 17 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

Security Threat Modeling (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 1)(6 mappings)

ORAN-SEC-1.1Threat Modeling and Remediation3 targets
CRAF-4.2Threat Intelligence
CRAF-4.3Security Testing
CRAF-6.1Cyber Threat Landscape Monitoring
ORAN-SEC-1.2Risk Management3 targets
CRAF-1.1Cyber Risk Governance
CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
CRAF-3.6Third-Party Risk Management

Security Requirements (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 2 - O-R003)(4 mappings)

ORAN-SEC-2.1Interface Security Requirements2 targets
CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
CRAF-1.4Cyber Risk Roles and Responsibilities
ORAN-SEC-2.2Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
CRAF-5.3Recovery and Resilience
ORAN-SEC-2.3Least Privilege and Zero Trust
CRAF-3.1Access Control

Security Protocols (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 3)(3 mappings)

ORAN-SEC-3.1TLS Implementation3 targets
CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
CRAF-1.4Cyber Risk Roles and Responsibilities
CRAF-3.2Data Security

Security Testing (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 4)(2 mappings)

ORAN-SEC-4.1Security Test Specifications2 targets
CRAF-1.2Cyber Risk Strategy
CRAF-1.4Cyber Risk Roles and Responsibilities

Data and Application Security(2 mappings)

ORAN-SEC-5.2Application Security2 targets
CRAF-3.4Application Security
CRAF-4.3Security Testing

Related Comparisons

Other O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) comparisons

Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons

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 →

What are the key differences between O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) has 13 controls across its framework, while HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) covers 24 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (62% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Security Protocols (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 3), where 2 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls have no direct HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) equivalent.

How many controls map between O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

Of 13 total O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls, 8 map directly to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls — representing 62% 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 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

5 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) controls have no direct equivalent in HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). The highest concentration of gaps is in Security Protocols (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 3) with 2 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 O-RAN Alliance Security Specifications (O-RAN.WG11) and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Security Protocols (O-RAN.WG11 Pillar 3) (2 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.