Cross-Framework Mapping

Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14)vsFTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)

Name: Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) to FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) Control Mapping Dataset
Creator: TheArtOfService

See exactly how Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) controls map to FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

Controls Mapped

Gaps Found

50%

Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) maps to FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) with 50% coverage across 2 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 4 Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) controls identifies 2 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Data Localization.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 4 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 8 of 8 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Prohibited Acts(2 mappings)

VIETNAMCYBER-2Prohibited Acts (Access, Interception, Forgery, Content)2 targets

→FTC-Safeguards-IR-Plan-BoardReporting-FTC-NotificationWritten Incident Response Plan + Board Reporting + FTC Breach Notification (16 CFR 314.4(h), (i), (j))

→FTC-Safeguards-Scope-DefsScope, Definitions and Financial Institution Applicability (16 CFR 314.1, 314.2)

Incident Reporting(6 mappings)

VIETNAMCYBER-4Incident Reporting and Cooperation6 targets

→FTC-Safeguards-9-Elements9 Safeguard Elements - Access, Inventory, Encryption, Secure-Dev, MFA, Disposal, Change-Mgmt, Monitoring, Pen-Test (16 CFR 314.4(c))

→FTC-Safeguards-EffectiveDate-Small-InstitutionEffective Date, Small Institution Exemption and Sectoral Coordination (16 CFR 314.5, 314.6)

→FTC-Safeguards-IR-Plan-BoardReporting-FTC-NotificationWritten Incident Response Plan + Board Reporting + FTC Breach Notification (16 CFR 314.4(h), (i), (j))

→FTC-Safeguards-Risk-AssessmentWritten Risk Assessment (16 CFR 314.4(b))

→FTC-Safeguards-Scope-DefsScope, Definitions and Financial Institution Applicability (16 CFR 314.1, 314.2)

→FTC-Safeguards-ServiceProvider-EvaluationService Provider Oversight + Program Evaluation + Personnel Training (16 CFR 314.4(d-g))

Related Comparisons

Other Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) comparisons

Other FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) comparisons

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

✓ 718 framework browser
✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
✓ 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 800-53 ISO 27001 vs NIST CSF CMMC vs NIST 800-53 FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53 NIST CSF vs SOC 2 HIPAA vs NIST 800-53 ISO 27001 vs SOC 2 ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) and FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) has 4 controls across its framework, while FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) covers 11 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 2 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Data Localization, where 1 Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) controls have no direct FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) equivalent.

How many controls map between Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) and FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

Of 4 total Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) controls, 2 map directly to FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314) controls — representing 50% coverage. The remaining 2 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) to FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

2 Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) controls have no direct equivalent in FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314). The highest concentration of gaps is in Data Localization 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 Vietnam Law on Cybersecurity (No. 24/2018/QH14) and FTC GLBA Safeguards Rule (16 CFR Part 314)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Data Localization (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.