Cross-Framework Mapping

Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA)vsHL7 FHIR Security Framework

See exactly how Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) controls map to HL7 FHIR Security Framework. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

21
Controls Mapped
10
Gaps Found
26%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) maps to HL7 FHIR Security Framework with 26% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 31 Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) controls identifies 23 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in EU Cyber Resilience Act: Operations Security.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 31 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 21 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.

EU Cyber Resilience Act: Information Security Policies(1 mappings)

EU-CRA-04Roles and responsibilities definition
FHIR-SEC-3.3Scope-Based Authorization

EU Cyber Resilience Act: Access Control(11 mappings)

EU-CRA-13Authentication and password management5 targets
A01:2025Broken Access Control
A02:2025Security Misconfiguration
FHIR-SEC-2.1User Authentication
FHIR-SEC-2.3System-to-System Authentication
FHIR-SEC-3.2Consent-Based Access Control
EU-CRA-14Privileged access management4 targets
A01:2025Broken Access Control
FHIR-SEC-2.2SMART App Launch
FHIR-SEC-3.2Consent-Based Access Control
FHIR-SEC-3.3Scope-Based Authorization
EU-CRA-15Access review and recertification2 targets
A01:2025Broken Access Control
FHIR-SEC-3.2Consent-Based Access Control

EU Cyber Resilience Act: Cryptography(6 mappings)

EU-CRA-18Encryption of data in transit2 targets
A02:2025Security Misconfiguration
FHIR-SEC-1.1Transport Layer Security
EU-CRA-19Certificate management2 targets
A02:2025Security Misconfiguration
FHIR-SEC-1.1Transport Layer Security
EU-CRA-20Key lifecycle management2 targets
A02:2025Security Misconfiguration
FHIR-SEC-1.1Transport Layer Security

EU Cyber Resilience Act: Operations Security(2 mappings)

EU-CRA-24Logging and monitoring2 targets
FHIR-SEC-1.2Time Keeping
FHIR-SEC-4.1AuditEvent Logging

+1 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

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 Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) and HL7 FHIR Security Framework?

Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) has 31 controls across its framework, while HL7 FHIR Security Framework covers 13 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (26% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in EU Cyber Resilience Act: Operations Security, where 5 Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) controls have no direct HL7 FHIR Security Framework equivalent.

How many controls map between Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) and HL7 FHIR Security Framework?

Of 31 total Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) controls, 8 map directly to HL7 FHIR Security Framework controls — representing 26% coverage. The remaining 23 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) to HL7 FHIR Security Framework?

23 Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) controls have no direct equivalent in HL7 FHIR Security Framework. The highest concentration of gaps is in EU Cyber Resilience Act: Operations Security with 5 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 Proposal for a Regulation on Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) and HL7 FHIR Security Framework?

The domain with the highest gap count is EU Cyber Resilience Act: Operations Security (5 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.