Framework overlap

Does AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) cover Canada ITSG-33?

You hold AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) and have been told to do Canada ITSG-33. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

54% of Canada ITSG-33 you already have

AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) already covers about 54% of Canada ITSG-33, leaving 12 of 26 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 1 Likely covered 13 New work 12

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) reaches these. This is the list to scope.

CA-ITSG33-SC-02
Security Profiles
ITSG33-AU
Audit and Accountability (AU)
ITSG33-CA
Security Assessment and Authorization (CA)
ITSG33-MA
Maintenance (MA)
ITSG33-PE
Physical and Environmental Protection (PE)
ITSG33-PL
Planning (PL)
ITSG33-PS
Personnel Security (PS)
ITSG33-RMP-1
Departmental IT Security Risk Management Activities (Annex 1)
ITSG33-RMP-2
Information System Security Risk Management Activities / ISSIP (Annex 2)
ITSG33-RMP-4
Security Control Selection and Profiles (Annex 4A)
ITSG33-RMP-5
Security Assessment and Authorization
ITSG33-SA
System and Services Acquisition (SA)
Show the 14 you already have
CA-ITSG33-SC-01
Security Control Catalogue
CA-ITSG33-SC-03
Cloud Security
ITSG33-AC
Access Control (AC)
ITSG33-AT
Awareness and Training (AT)
ITSG33-CM
Configuration Management (CM)
ITSG33-CP
Contingency Planning (CP)
ITSG33-IA
Identification and Authentication (IA)
ITSG33-IR
Incident Response (IR)
ITSG33-MP
Media Protection (MP)
ITSG33-RA
Risk Assessment (RA)
ITSG33-RMP-3
Security Categorization
ITSG33-RMP-6
Continuous Monitoring
ITSG33-SC
System and Communications Protection (SC)
ITSG33-SI
System and Information Integrity (SI)

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) 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