Standards Comparison

    FISMA

    Mandatory
    2014

    U.S. federal law mandating risk-based cybersecurity programs

    VS

    SAMA CSF

    Mandatory
    2017

    Saudi regulatory framework for financial cybersecurity resilience

    Quick Verdict

    FISMA mandates NIST RMF for US federal agencies and contractors via law, while SAMA CSF requires maturity-based controls for Saudi financial firms through regulation. Agencies ensure compliance for contracts; Saudi banks build resilience against sector threats.

    Cybersecurity

    FISMA

    Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA 2014)

    Cost
    €€€€
    Complexity
    Medium
    Implementation Time
    18-24 months

    Key Features

    • Mandates NIST RMF 7-step risk management lifecycle
    • Requires continuous monitoring and ongoing authorization
    • Applies to federal agencies and contractors handling data
    • Enforces FIPS 199 system impact categorization
    • Demands annual IG evaluations with maturity scoring
    Cybersecurity

    SAMA CSF

    SAMA Cyber Security Framework Version 1.0

    Cost
    €€€€
    Complexity
    High
    Implementation Time
    6-12 months

    Key Features

    • Six-level maturity model with Level 3 minimum
    • Four domains: governance, risk, operations, third-party
    • Board oversight and independent CISO requirement
    • Principle-based controls aligned to NIST/ISO
    • Periodic self-assessments and regulatory audits

    Detailed Analysis

    A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

    FISMA Details

    What It Is

    Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 is a U.S. federal law establishing a risk-based framework for protecting federal information and systems. It mandates agency-wide information security programs emphasizing continuous monitoring, incident reporting, and NIST Risk Management Framework (RMF) implementation across civilian executive branch agencies and contractors.

    Key Components

    • NIST RMF 7 steps: Prepare, Categorize, Select, Implement, Assess, Authorize, Monitor.
    • NIST SP 800-53 controls tailored by FIPS 199 impact levels (Low/Moderate/High).
    • Annual reporting via standardized metrics; IG independent evaluations with maturity levels (1-5).
    • Oversight by OMB, DHS/CISA, focusing on CIA triad protections.

    Why Organizations Use It

    Federal agencies and contractors face legal mandates; noncompliance risks funding loss, debarment. Provides risk reduction, resilience, market access (e.g., FedRAMP). Builds trust, aligns with mission outcomes, enables competitive federal contracting.

    Implementation Overview

    Phased RMF approach: governance/inventory, categorization/control selection, implementation/assessment, continuous monitoring. Applies to all federal entities/contractors; requires SSPs, POA&Ms, ATOs. Involves automation, supply chain oversight; scalable for agencies/vendors.

    SAMA CSF Details

    What It Is

    The Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority Cyber Security Framework (SAMA CSF), Version 1.0 (May 2017), is a mandatory regulatory framework for SAMA-regulated financial institutions in Saudi Arabia. It ensures detection, resistance, response, and recovery from cyber threats via governance, controls, and maturity modeling. Adopting a principle-based, risk-oriented approach, it prescribes outcomes across domains with self-assessments.

    Key Components

    • Four domains: Leadership & Governance, Risk Management & Compliance, Operations & Technology, Third-Party Security
    • Subdomains with principles, objectives, control considerations (100+ subcontrols)
    • Six-level Maturity Model (0-5; minimum Level 3: structured/formalized)
    • Aligned with NIST, ISO 27001, PCI-DSS; compliance via questionnaires and audits

    Why Organizations Use It

    • Regulatory mandate avoids penalties, scrutiny
    • Builds resilience, efficiency, competitive differentiation
    • Enhances risk intelligence, vendor leverage, stakeholder trust
    • Supports strategic growth in digital finance

    Implementation Overview

    • Phased: initiation/gap analysis, risk assessment, design/deployment, operate/monitor, audit/improve
    • Targets banks, insurers, etc., in Saudi Arabia
    • No certification; self-assessments and SAMA reviews required (178 words)

    Key Differences

    Scope

    FISMA
    Federal info systems, NIST RMF 7 steps
    SAMA CSF
    Financial sector, 4 domains + maturity model

    Industry

    FISMA
    US federal agencies/contractors
    SAMA CSF
    Saudi financial institutions only

    Nature

    FISMA
    US federal law, mandatory for agencies
    SAMA CSF
    Regulatory framework, mandatory for regulated entities

    Testing

    FISMA
    Annual IG assessments, continuous monitoring
    SAMA CSF
    Periodic self-assessments, SAMA audits

    Penalties

    FISMA
    Contract loss, debarment, IG reports
    SAMA CSF
    Fines, supervisory actions, license risks

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Common questions about FISMA and SAMA CSF

    FISMA FAQ

    SAMA CSF FAQ

    You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

    Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

    Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

    Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

    100+ Standards & Regulations
    AI-Powered Insights
    Collaborative Assessments
    Actionable Recommendations

    Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages