HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice
What is the difference between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice?
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) is a risk management framework applying in Hong Kong, with 96 controls across 8 domains. GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice is a risk management framework applying in International, with 113 controls across 11 domains. Both govern the same subject, so their requirements overlap; the mapping below shows which controls carry across and which are asked for by only one of them.
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)96 controls
GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice113 controls
Questions people ask about HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice
What is the difference between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice?
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) has 96 controls while GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice has 113 controls. Both frameworks address compliance requirements but differ in scope, focus, and applicability. Use our platform to explore the exact control-to-control mappings.
Do I need both HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice?
Whether you need both depends on your industry, regulatory requirements, and customer expectations. Many organizations implement multiple frameworks simultaneously. Our compliance platform helps you map controls between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice so you can identify shared requirements and avoid duplicate effort.
How do HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice controls map to each other?
Our platform maps controls between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice at a granular level. Each mapping shows whether controls are fully aligned, partially aligned, or represent gaps. This helps you prioritize implementation when pursuing both frameworks.
Which framework should I implement first, HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) or GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice?
The best starting point depends on your specific regulatory requirements, industry, and customer demands. Consider which framework is most urgently required by your stakeholders or regulators. Use our free compliance platform to run a gap analysis and determine the optimal implementation sequence.
Each framework on its own
Comparisons people read next
Each of these compares one of the two standards above against another it shares controls with.
HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs US Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) - Higher Education Safeguards Rule3 shared controlsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs TEFCA - Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement3 shared controlsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) vs Privacy Act 1988 (Australia)3 shared controlsGAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice vs Annex 11 to EU GMP - Computerised Systems5 shared controlsGAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)4 shared controlsGAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements4 shared controls
See all control mappings with interactive gap analysis
Explore the complete mapping between HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) and GAMP 5 - Good Automated Manufacturing Practice on our compliance platform.
Written and maintained by Gerard Blokdyk, The Art of Service.