NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1NIST SP 800-218

NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 covers 61.9% of NIST SP 800-218

26 of the 42 controls in NIST SP 800-218 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1. 16 are genuine gaps. Every claim below was judged against both control sets and then argued against; the ones that did not survive are published further down with the reason each failed.

61.9%
of the target already covered
26
controls evidenced
16
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of NIST SP 800-218 your NIST SP 800-161 Rev 1 evidence satisfies. The reverse pair is a different number, often very different, because a security standard has enormous depth for access control and almost none for lawful basis or data subject rights.

91 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed. Signed off 2026-08-19, review level machine verified. Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

Where the gaps are

Coverage is never evenly spread. A source standard usually satisfies one part of a target almost completely and barely touches another, and which part is which is the thing worth knowing before you plan the work.

Protect the Software4 of 4 evidenced
NIST SP 800-218: Access Control4 of 5 evidenced, 1 to do
Produce Well Secured Software6 of 8 evidenced, 2 to do
Respond to Vulnerabilities2 of 3 evidenced, 1 to do
NIST SP 800-218: Information Security Policies3 of 5 evidenced, 2 to do
Prepare the Organization4 of 8 evidenced, 4 to do
NIST SP 800-218: Asset Management2 of 5 evidenced, 3 to do
NIST SP 800-218: Cryptography1 of 4 evidenced, 3 to do

Theme level, not control level, deliberately. The per-control list of what is evidenced and what is a gap is the report itself, so publishing it here would be publishing the thing being sold.

Claims that held

A sample. Each one names the control whose evidence does the work, the control it satisfies, and why.

SR-5SP800-218-PO.1.3argued against and upheld
Communicate Requirements to Third-Party Providers

Uses acquisition strategy and contract tools to impose security terms on component providers.

SA-4SP800-218-PO.1.3argued against and upheld
Communicate Requirements to Third-Party Providers

Puts security requirements and required evidence into supplier contracts for acquired components.

AT-3SP800-218-PO.2.2argued against and upheld
Training and Skills Maintenance

Role based training for the engineering and acquisition roles carrying these duties.

PM-2SP800-218-PO.2.3argued against and upheld
Obtain Management Commitment to Secure Development

Places programme accountability with a named leader holding authority to act.

SA-15SP800-218-PO.3.1argued against and upheld
Supporting Toolchain Selection

Directly addresses selection and security of development standards and tooling.

SA-4SP800-218-PO.4.1argued against and upheld
Criteria for Software Security

Establishes acceptance criteria and the evidence required before software is accepted.

SA-5SP800-218-PO.4.2argued against and upheld
Gather and Safeguard Security Check Information

Obtains and retains the documentation needed to assess and secure the software.

SA-15SP800-218-PO.5.1argued against and upheld
Secure Development Environment Implementation

Covers the development environment, standards and tooling on which delivered security depends.

Claims that did not hold

Nothing proposed for this pair was rejected in review. That is unusual and worth knowing rather than hiding: it means the candidate set was small and every candidate held.

The full report

Everything above is a sample. The report is every evidenced control and every gap, with the reasoning and the source document behind each one, in a form you can hand to an assessor. $299, emailed immediately.

Buy this crosswalk