Framework overlap

Does MARS-E cover NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3?

You hold MARS-E and have been told to do NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

69% of NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 you already have

MARS-E already covers about 69% of NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3, leaving 11 of 35 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 10 Likely covered 14 New work 11

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in MARS-E reaches these. This is the list to scope.

3.1.1
Authorized Access Control
3.1.2
Transaction and Function Control
3.13
Deploy a Data Loss Prevention Solution
3.13.1
Boundary Protection Assessment
3.14
Log Sensitive Data Access
3.15
Planning
3.8
Document Data Flows
3.9.1
Personnel Screening Assessment
FEDRAMP-SC-1
System and Communications Protection Policy
FEDRAMP-SC-12
Cryptographic Key Establishment and Management
FEDRAMP-SC-7
Boundary Protection
Show the 24 you already have
3.10
Encrypt Sensitive Data in Transit
3.11
Encrypt Sensitive Data at Rest
3.2.1
Account data storage minimised
3.3.1
Audit Record Creation
3.7
Establish and Maintain a Data Classification Scheme
3.7.1
Key generation procedures
3.9
Encrypt Data on Removable Media
FEDRAMP-SC-13
Cryptographic Protection
FEDRAMP-SC-28
Protection of Information at Rest
FEDRAMP-SC-8
Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity
3.1
Physical Security
3.12
Segment Data Processing and Storage Based on Sensitivity
3.16
System and Services Acquisition
3.17
Supply Chain Risk Management
3.2
Establish and Maintain a Data Inventory
3.3
Configure Data Access Control Lists
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
FEDRAMP-CM-6
Configuration Settings
FEDRAMP-CP-9
System Backup

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in MARS-E 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