US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data SecurityvsNIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)
See exactly how US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security controls map to NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security maps to NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) with 34% coverage across 14 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 41 US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security controls identifies 27 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Compliance and Enforcement.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 41 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 28 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.
Compliance and Enforcement(20 mappings)
+8 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
Related Comparisons
Other US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security comparisons
Other NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 693 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
- ✓ 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 US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security and NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)?
US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security has 41 controls across its framework, while NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) covers 31 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 14 overlapping controls (34% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Compliance and Enforcement, where 27 US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security controls have no direct NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) equivalent.
How many controls map between US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security and NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)?
Of 41 total US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security controls, 14 map directly to NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) controls — representing 34% coverage. The remaining 27 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security to NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)?
27 US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security controls have no direct equivalent in NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). The highest concentration of gaps is in Compliance and Enforcement with 27 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 US ITAR and EAR — Export Control and Data Security and NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Compliance and Enforcement (27 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.