Framework overlap

Does ISO/IEC 27014:2020 cover NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3?

You hold ISO/IEC 27014:2020 and have been told to do NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

43% of NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 you already have

ISO/IEC 27014:2020 already covers about 43% of NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3, leaving 20 of 35 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 5 Likely covered 10 New work 20

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ISO/IEC 27014:2020 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

3.1.1
Authorized Access Control
3.1.2
Transaction and Function Control
3.10
Encrypt Sensitive Data in Transit
3.12
Segment Data Processing and Storage Based on Sensitivity
3.13
Deploy a Data Loss Prevention Solution
3.13.1
Boundary Protection Assessment
3.14
Log Sensitive Data Access
3.15
Planning
3.2.1
Account data storage minimised
3.7
Establish and Maintain a Data Classification Scheme
3.7.1
Key generation procedures
3.8
Document Data Flows
3.9
Encrypt Data on Removable Media
3.9.1
Personnel Screening Assessment
FEDRAMP-SC-1
System and Communications Protection Policy
FEDRAMP-SC-12
Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management
FEDRAMP-SC-13
Cryptographic Protection
FEDRAMP-SC-28
Protection of Information at Rest
FEDRAMP-SC-7
Boundary Protection
FEDRAMP-SC-8
Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
Show the 15 you already have
3.1
Physical Security
3.11
Encrypt Sensitive Data at Rest
3.3
Configure Data Access Control Lists
FEDRAMP-CM-6
Configuration Settings
FEDRAMP-CP-9
System Backup
3.16
System and Services Acquisition
3.17
Supply Chain Risk Management
3.2
Establish and Maintain a Data Inventory
3.3.1
Audit Record Creation
3.4
Enforce Data Retention
3.5
Securely Dispose of Data
3.6
Encrypt Data on End-User Devices
3.6.1
Incident Response Capability
FEDRAMP-CM-1
Configuration Management Policy
FEDRAMP-CM-2
Baseline Configuration

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ISO/IEC 27014:2020 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