HKMA SPM vs NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems
What is the difference between HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems?
HKMA SPM is a risk management framework applying in Hong Kong, with 11 controls across 7 domains. NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems is a information security framework applying in the United States, with 8 controls across 8 domains. They govern different subjects, so the overlap is limited to the governance requirements they share. The mapping below shows where that is.
HKMA SPM11 controls
NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems8 controls
Questions people ask about HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems
What is the difference between HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems?
HKMA SPM has 11 controls while NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems has 8 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 SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems?
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 SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems so you can identify shared requirements and avoid duplicate effort.
How do HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems controls map to each other?
Our platform maps controls between HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems 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 SPM or NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems?
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 SPM vs Protective Security Policy Framework (PSPF) Release 20243 shared controlsHKMA SPM vs OWASP ASVS3 shared controlsHKMA SPM vs MITRE D3FEND3 shared controlsNIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements4 shared controlsNIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems vs OWASP ASVS4 shared controlsNIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems vs FedRAMP Rev 54 shared controls
See all control mappings with interactive gap analysis
Explore the complete mapping between HKMA SPM and NIST Special Publication 800-34 Revision 1, Contingency Planning Guide for Federal Information Systems on our compliance platform.
Written and maintained by Gerard Blokdyk, The Art of Service.