TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

Open Banking SecurityvsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

See exactly how Open Banking Security controls map to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

21
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
62%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Open Banking Security maps to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 62% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 Open Banking Security controls identifies 3 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Fraud + TRA + Rate Limiting + Sandbox.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 700 frameworks | 330K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 21 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 330K+ mappings across 700 frameworks.

SCA + Consent + UX(2 mappings)

OPENBANK-2Strong Customer Authentication (SCA), Consent Lifecycle, and Customer UX2 targets
→NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria
→NIST-CSF-PR.AA-05Access permissions, entitlements, and authorizations are defined and managed

mTLS + Signing + Keys(2 mappings)

OPENBANK-3Mutual TLS, Token Binding, Request Signing (JWS), Key Management2 targets
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated throughout the SDLC

TPP Onboarding(6 mappings)

OPENBANK-4Third Party Provider (TPP) Onboarding, Directory Integration, Due Diligence6 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established
→NIST-CSF-GV.SC-01Cybersecurity supply chain risk management program is established
→NIST-CSF-PR.DS-10The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained

Logging + Reporting + SLA(3 mappings)

OPENBANK-7Logging, Monitoring, Regulatory Reporting, SLA, Availability3 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed
→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties

Incident + BCM(7 mappings)

OPENBANK-8Incident Detection, Response, Customer Notification, Post-Incident Review, BCM7 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-04Incident response plans and other cybersecurity plans are established and maintained
→NIST-CSF-PR.DS-10The confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data-in-use are protected
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-03Mechanisms are implemented to achieve resilience requirements in normal and adverse situations
→NIST-CSF-PR.IR-04Adequate resource capacity to ensure availability is maintained
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-01The recovery portion of the incident response plan is executed
→NIST-CSF-RC.RP-06End-of-recovery is declared based on criteria and documentation
→NIST-CSF-RS.MA-01The incident response plan is executed in coordination with relevant third parties

+1 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 700 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other Open Banking Security comparisons

Open Banking Security vs APRA CPS 2345 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 20245 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs FFIEC IT Examination Handbook5 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs Singapore Government Instruction Manual on ICT&SS Management (IM8)5 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs UK Open Banking Standard5 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements5 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs Annex 11 to EU GMP - Computerised Systems5 mappingsOpen Banking Security vs South Korea ISMS-P5 mappings

Other NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 comparisons

ISO 27001:2022 vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.082 mappingsBelgium CyberFundamentals vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.032 mappingsASEAN Data Management Framework vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.025 mappingsAzure Security Benchmark vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsNIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.022 mappingsAustralian Energy Sector Cyber Security Framework (AESCSF) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 mappingsAWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) vs NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.019 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 700 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 700 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (330K+)
  • ✓ 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 Open Banking Security and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Open Banking Security has 8 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (62% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Fraud + TRA + Rate Limiting + Sandbox, where 1 Open Banking Security controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between Open Banking Security and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Of 8 total Open Banking Security controls, 5 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls — representing 62% coverage. The remaining 3 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Open Banking Security to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

3 Open Banking Security controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Fraud + TRA + Rate Limiting + Sandbox 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 Open Banking Security and NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Fraud + TRA + Rate Limiting + Sandbox (1 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.