NIST 800-171
U.S. framework protecting CUI in nonfederal systems
AS9110C
Aerospace QMS standard for aircraft maintenance organizations
Quick Verdict
NIST 800-171 protects CUI confidentiality for defense contractors via cybersecurity controls and assessments, while AS9110C ensures quality management for aerospace MROs through process controls and audits. Organizations adopt them for contract compliance and market access.
NIST 800-171
NIST SP 800-171 Protecting CUI in Nonfederal Systems
Key Features
- Protects CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems
- Requires SSP and POA&M documentation artifacts
- 110 requirements across 14-17 control families
- Supports CUI enclave scoping for boundaries
- Enforced via DFARS contracts for contractors
AS9110C
AS9110C: Quality Management Systems for Aircraft Maintenance
Key Features
- Configuration management and traceability controls
- Counterfeit parts prevention and detection
- Risk-based thinking in planning and operations
- Human factors and competence requirements
- Regulatory alignment with FAA/EASA Part-145
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
NIST 800-171 Details
What It Is
NIST SP 800-171 (Revision 3, May 2024) is a U.S. government framework providing security requirements to protect Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) confidentiality in nonfederal systems. Tailored from SP 800-53 Moderate baseline, it uses a control-based approach focused on scoping to CUI components.
Key Components
- 97-110 requirements organized into 14-17 families (e.g., Access Control, Audit, Supply Chain Risk Management).
- Core artifacts: System Security Plan (SSP) and Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M).
- Assessment via SP 800-171A (examine/interview/test methods).
- Built on FIPS 200 and SP 800-53; supports tailoring and equivalencies.
Why Organizations Use It
- Mandatory for federal contractors via DFARS 252.204-7012 and CMMC Level 2.
- Reduces breach risks, ensures contract eligibility, builds supply chain trust.
- Enhances cybersecurity maturity and competitive edge in DoD procurement.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: scoping, gap analysis, control deployment, evidence collection.
- Applies to contractors handling CUI; scalable via enclaves.
- Self-assessment or third-party audits (C3PAO); ongoing monitoring required.
AS9110C Details
What It Is
AS9110C is the international quality management system (QMS) standard for aviation maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) organizations. It extends ISO 9001:2015 with aerospace-specific requirements, focusing on safety-critical processes like configuration management and airworthiness. It employs a risk-based thinking approach via the High-Level Structure (HLS) and PDCA cycle.
Key Components
- Core clauses 4-10 covering context, leadership, planning, support, operation, evaluation, improvement.
- Aviation additions: counterfeit parts prevention, human factors, traceability, release controls.
- Built on ISO 9001 with ~20 maintenance-specific notes; voluntary certification via accredited bodies.
Why Organizations Use It
- Meets customer/OEM contracts and regulatory alignment (FAA/EASA Part-145).
- Mitigates safety risks, reduces rework/downtime, enhances market access.
- Builds stakeholder trust through proven operational excellence and OASIS listing.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: gap analysis, process design, training, audits, certification.
- Applies to MROs globally; 6-12 months typical, requiring internal audits and management reviews.
Key Differences
| Aspect | NIST 800-171 | AS9110C |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems | Aerospace MRO quality management system |
| Industry | Defense contractors, federal supply chains | Aviation maintenance, repair organizations |
| Nature | Cybersecurity requirements, contract-mandated | Certification standard based on ISO 9001 |
| Testing | SPRS scoring, CMMC assessments, self/third-party | Internal audits, management reviews, certification audits |
| Penalties | Contract ineligibility, DFARS reporting obligations | Loss of certification, regulatory sanctions |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about NIST 800-171 and AS9110C
NIST 800-171 FAQ
AS9110C FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
What if the EU would not have made GDPR mandatory...
Explore a world without mandatory GDPR: How would organizations manage data? What data privacy regs would emerge? Uncover impacts on businesses and privacy laws
NIST CSF 2.0 Deep Dive: Mastering the Updated Framework Core Functions
Unpack NIST CSF 2.0's enhanced Core Functions: Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover. Get SME playbooks, governance shifts & strategies for cyber
Measuring CIS Controls v8.1 in the Real World: KPIs, Dashboards, and Automated Evidence for Continuous Assurance
Master CIS Controls v8.1 measurement with essential KPIs, executive-ready dashboards, and automated evidence collection for continuous assurance. Make complianc
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.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
ISO 37301 vs SOC 2
Compare ISO 37301 vs SOC 2: Certifiable CMS for compliance risks vs trust criteria for data security. Uncover differences, integrations & benefits. Choose wisely now!
WCAG vs NIST 800-53
Unlock WCAG vs NIST 800-53: Compare accessibility (POUR, AA conformance) with security/privacy controls (20 families, baselines). Master compliance strategies now!
EMAS vs APRA CPS 234
Compare EMAS vs APRA CPS 234: EU eco-management scheme meets Australia's info security standard. Unlock compliance strategies, key differences & implementation tips. Read now!