NIST SP 800-172 covers 10.7% of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5
32 of the 300 controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST SP 800-172. 268 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.
What this leaves you to do
NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 has 300 controls. Holding NIST SP 800-172 already evidences 32 of them, so the work in front of you is 268 controls, not 300, which is 89% of the standard rather than all of it.
That is the whole claim. Every number in that sentence comes from the two counts above it and can be re-derived from the free tools without taking our word for any of it.
In money, using only our numbers. The full report is $299 and names 32 controls of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 you do not have to implement again, which is $9.34 per control identified. That arithmetic uses our price and our count and assumes nothing about you.
In your hours, using your assumption. We do not know what a control costs you to implement, so pick the column that looks like your organisation. These are your figures, not our claim.
| If a control takes you | 4 hours | 8 hours | 16 hours |
|---|---|---|---|
| the 32 already evidenced are | 128 hours | 256 hours | 512 hours |
| and the 268 remaining are | 1,072 hours | 2,144 hours | 4,288 hours |
Multiply by your own rate. We publish no rate because we have not measured yours, and a number built on an invented rate is the kind of claim this platform exists to argue against.
This number is directional. It says how much of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 your NIST SP 800-172 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.
82 candidate mappings were examined and 12 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.
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.
Restricting access to only organization owned, provisioned or issued resources governs use of external systems.
Secure information transfer solutions controlling flows between security domains is information flow enforcement.
Dual authorization for critical operations prevents one person completing a sensitive action alone.
Awareness training on hire, annually and on system change covering social engineering and advanced threats is this control.
Practical exercises for managers, senior executives and selected personnel is role-based training.
Assessing whether security solutions are effective, at least annually, is a control assessment.
Ongoing monitoring of systems and components with advanced detection is continuous monitoring.
Annual penetration testing by independent agents with scanning and expert ad hoc tests is this control.
Claims that did not hold
12 proposed mappings for this pair were rejected. They are kept in the graph rather than deleted, so what was thrown out is as inspectable as what survived. A crosswalk that never rejects anything is not being judged.
control identity corrected 2026-08-19: issued 3.13.2e is introducing unpredictability into operations; these mappings are least privilege and secure engineering, a subject that appears nowhere in the issued 800-172
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
corrected 2026-08-19: judged from a title claiming multifactor authentication, while the control carried 3.5.2e password-management text. Issued 800-172 3.5.3e is comply-to-connect: prohibit connection of unknown or unverified components. Authentication evidence does not satisfy it.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
control identity corrected 2026-08-19: issued 3.13.3e is confusing and misleading adversaries; these mappings were judged against diversity content, which belongs to issued 3.13.1e
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
control identity corrected 2026-08-19: issued 3.13.2e is introducing unpredictability into operations; these mappings are least privilege and secure engineering, a subject that appears nowhere in the issued 800-172
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
corrected 2026-08-19: judged from a description that was actually issued 3.13.3e (deception). Issued 800-172 3.13.4e is physical and logical isolation into security domains behind managed interfaces.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
control identity corrected 2026-08-19: issued 3.13.3e is confusing and misleading adversaries; these mappings were judged against diversity content, which belongs to issued 3.13.1e
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
corrected 2026-08-19: judged from a description that was actually issued 3.13.3e (deception). Issued 800-172 3.13.4e is physical and logical isolation into security domains behind managed interfaces.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
control identity corrected 2026-08-19: issued 3.13.5e is distributing and relocating system functions; this control held three different requirements across its title, description and evidence
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
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