Framework overlap

Does ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices cover BIMCO Cyber Security?

You hold ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices and have been told to do BIMCO Cyber Security. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

58% of BIMCO Cyber Security you already have

ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices already covers about 58% of BIMCO Cyber Security, leaving 11 of 26 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 15 New work 11

No control in ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices maps directly to one in BIMCO Cyber Security. Everything counted as covered is covered because both map to the same third standard, which is what a crosswalk is, but it is an inference rather than a lookup.

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices reaches these. This is the list to scope.

BIMCO-1.5
Plans and procedures
BIMCO-1.8
Relationship with vendors and other external parties
BIMCO-10.3
Recovery plan
BIMCO-10.4
Data recovery capability
BIMCO-10.5
Investigating cyber incidents
BIMCO-3.6
Remote access
BIMCO-3.7
System and software maintenance
BIMCO-6.3
Third party risk assessments
BIMCO-7.1
Defence in depth and in breadth
BIMCO-8.2
Malware detection
BIMCO-9
Establish contingency plans
Show the 15 you already have
BIMCO-1.2
Senior management involvement
BIMCO-1.3
Roles, responsibilities and tasks
BIMCO-1.4
Differences between IT and OT systems
BIMCO-10.2
The four phases of incident response
BIMCO-2.1
Threat actors
BIMCO-2.2
Types of cyber threats
BIMCO-3.1
Common vulnerabilities
BIMCO-3.3
Typical vulnerable systems
BIMCO-3.4
Ship to shore interface
BIMCO-4
Assessing the likelihood
BIMCO-5.1
Impact assessment (CIA model)
BIMCO-6.2
The four phases of a risk assessment
BIMCO-7.2
Technical protection measures
BIMCO-7.3
Procedural protection measures
BIMCO-8.1
Detection, logging, blocking and alerts

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ASIC Cyber Resilience Good Practices to that control. Likely covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified fact.

Coverage is not symmetric. Run it the other way and you will get a different number; both are correct.

From 332,959 cross-framework control mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.

Try another pair ยท Today's edition