Framework overlap

Does NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security cover Canada ITSG-33?

You hold NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security and have been told to do Canada ITSG-33. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

50% of Canada ITSG-33 you already have

NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security already covers about 50% of Canada ITSG-33, leaving 13 of 26 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 1 Likely covered 12 New work 13

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security reaches these. This is the list to scope.

CA-ITSG33-SC-02
Security Profiles
ITSG33-AT
Awareness and Training (AT)
ITSG33-CA
Security Assessment and Authorization (CA)
ITSG33-MA
Maintenance (MA)
ITSG33-MP
Media Protection (MP)
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-5
Security Assessment and Authorization
ITSG33-SC
System and Communications Protection (SC)
ITSG33-SI
System and Information Integrity (SI)
Show the 13 you already have
CA-ITSG33-SC-01
Security Control Catalogue
CA-ITSG33-SC-03
Cloud Security
ITSG33-AC
Access Control (AC)
ITSG33-AU
Audit and Accountability (AU)
ITSG33-CM
Configuration Management (CM)
ITSG33-CP
Contingency Planning (CP)
ITSG33-IA
Identification and Authentication (IA)
ITSG33-IR
Incident Response (IR)
ITSG33-RA
Risk Assessment (RA)
ITSG33-RMP-3
Security Categorization
ITSG33-RMP-4
Security Control Selection and Profiles (Annex 4A)
ITSG33-RMP-6
Continuous Monitoring
ITSG33-SA
System and Services Acquisition (SA)

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3: Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security 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