Framework overlap

Does NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 cover Mexico LFPDPPP?

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

75% of Mexico LFPDPPP you already have

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 already covers about 75% of Mexico LFPDPPP, leaving 2 of 8 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 6 New work 2

No control in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 maps directly to one in Mexico LFPDPPP. 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.

MX-LFPDPPP-Eight-Principles-Article-6-Licitud-Consentimiento-Informacion-Calidad-Finalidad-Lealtad-Proporcionalidad-Responsabilidad
Mexico LFPDPPP Eight Principles + Article 6 + Licitud + Consentimiento + Informacion + Calidad + Finalidad + Lealtad + Proporcionalidad + Responsabilidad
MX-LFPDPPP-Scope-Article-3-DOF-5-July-2010-Effective-6-July-2010-INAI-Reglamento-2011-Constitution-Articles-6-16
Mexico LFPDPPP Scope + Article 3 + DOF 5 July 2010 + INAI + Reglamento 2011 + Constitution Articles 6 and 16
Show the 6 you already have
MX-LFPDPPP-ARCO-Rights-Articles-22-25-Acceso-Rectificacion-Cancelacion-Oposicion-Reglamento-89-103
Mexico LFPDPPP ARCO Rights + Articles 22-25 + Acceso + Rectificacion + Cancelacion + Oposicion + Reglamento 89-103
MX-LFPDPPP-Cross-Border-Transfer-Articles-36-37-Reglamento-66-68-Domestic-International-APEC-CBPR-USMCA
Mexico LFPDPPP Cross-Border + Articles 36-37 + Reglamento 66 + 68 + Domestic + International + APEC CBPR + USMCA
MX-LFPDPPP-Enforcement-INAI-Articles-63-64-67-320K-Days-Minimum-Wage-3-Year-Prison-TFJA-Recurso-Revision-SCJN
Mexico LFPDPPP Enforcement + INAI + Articles 63-64-67 + 320K Days Minimum Wage + 3 Year Prison + TFJA + Recurso de Revision + SCJN
MX-LFPDPPP-Governance-Officer-Reglamento-47-50-Security-Manual-57-Risk-Assessment-61-Self-Regulation-Parameters-2014
Mexico LFPDPPP Governance + Officer + Reglamento 47 + Security Manual 50 + Risk Assessment 57 + Self-Regulation Parameters 2014
MX-LFPDPPP-Security-Breach-Notification-Reglamento-63-No-Time-Limit-INAI-Recommendations-CERT-MX
Mexico LFPDPPP Security + Breach Notification + Reglamento 63 + No Specified Time + INAI Recommendations + CERT-MX
MX-LFPDPPP-Sensitive-Article-3-VI-Genetic-Health-Sexual-Religious-Article-9-Minors-18-Parental-Consent
Mexico LFPDPPP Sensitive Data + Article 3 Section VI + Genetic + Health + Sexual + Religious + Article 9 Minors + Parental Consent

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