Framework overlap

Does NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 cover FedRAMP Rev 5?

You hold NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and have been told to do FedRAMP Rev 5. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

50% of FedRAMP Rev 5 you already have

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 already covers about 50% of FedRAMP Rev 5, leaving 6 of 12 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 6 New work 6

No control in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps directly to one in FedRAMP Rev 5. 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

FedRAMP-3PAO
3PAO Assessment, FedRAMP Marketplace and Accreditation
FedRAMP-NIST-800-53-Rev5
Coordination with NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 + FedRAMP High + FedRAMP Moderate frameworks
FedRAMP-OMB-M-24-15
OMB Memorandum M-24-15 (July 2024) - FedRAMP modernization
FedRAMP-Program
FedRAMP Program establishment, PMO and authorization paths
FedRAMP-StateRAMP-GovRAMP
Coordination with StateRAMP, GovRAMP and state + local + tribal government cloud authorization
FedRAMP-Status
FedRAMP Rev 5 - corpus status, baseline references, M-24-15 modernization pipeline
Show the 6 you already have
FedRAMP-Baselines
FedRAMP Baseline Selection (Low, Moderate, High, LI-SaaS) and Control Overlay Parameters
FedRAMP-Boundary
Authorization Boundary, SSP, SAR, POA&M documentation
FedRAMP-ConMon
Continuous Monitoring (ConMon) and Significant Change Requests
FedRAMP-IncidentReporting
FedRAMP incident reporting to PMO and US-CERT
FedRAMP-PII-Privacy
FedRAMP PII processing + privacy controls (NIST 800-53 Rev 5 PT family + Privacy Act)
FedRAMP-SupplyChain-SBOM
FedRAMP supply chain risk management + SBOM (per EO 14028 + NIST 800-218 SSDF)

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 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