What is the primary objective of **NIST 800-171**?

**NIST SP 800-171 provides recommended security requirements for protecting the confidentiality of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) in nonfederal systems and organizations.** Revision 3 (r3), superseding r2 on May 14, 2024, organizes requirements into 17 families, including new additions like Planning (PL), System and Services Acquisition (SA), and Supply Chain Risk Management (SR). It applies to components that process, store, transmit CUI, or provide protection for such components, enabling federal agencies to impose consistent safeguards via contracts like DFARS 252.204-7012.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **NIST 800-171**?

**Nonfederal organizations handling CUI, such as DoD contractors and subcontractors, must implement NIST SP 800-171 when mandated by federal contracts.** DFARS 252.204-7012 requires "adequate security" for covered contractor information systems processing Covered Defense Information (CDI), defined as unclassified CUI from the CUI Registry. Applicability targets systems not operated on behalf of the government, excluding COTS-only acquisitions; cloud providers must meet FedRAMP Moderate equivalence.

Does **NIST 800-171** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**No, NIST SP 800-171 does not mandate external audits or third-party certification; it relies on self-assessment via SP 800-171A procedures.** Organizations produce a System Security Plan (SSP) describing implementation and a Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) for gaps. DoD may require SPRS score submission or CMMC Level 2 assessments by C3PAOs for prioritized contracts, using examine/interview/test methods.

How often should an assessment for **NIST 800-171** be performed?

**Organizations must perform NIST SP 800-171 assessments at least annually, with continuous monitoring for changes.** SP 800-171A r3 supports ongoing evidence generation via SSP updates and POA&M reviews. DoD requires annual SPRS reaffirmation for self-assessments; CMMC Level 2 mandates triennial C3PAO recertification plus annual affirmations.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **NIST 800-171**?

**Non-compliance with NIST SP 800-171 risks contract ineligibility, termination, and exclusion from DoD awards.** DFARS 252.204-7012 violations trigger 72-hour incident reporting failures, remedial demands, potential False Claims Act liability, and SPRS scores as low as -203, disqualifying bidders. Reputational damage and forensic support obligations compound losses.

An **NIST 800-171** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, NIST SP 800-171 Appendix D provides explicit mappings to NIST SP 800-53 and ISO 27001.** R2 aligns to SP 800-53 Moderate baseline and NIST CSF categories; r3 uses SP 800-53 r5 language. FedRAMP Moderate often exceeds 800-171, enabling control inheritance with SSP documentation of shared responsibilities.

What is the first step to begin implementing **NIST 800-171**?

**The first step is defining the system boundary and scoping components that process, store, transmit CUI, or protect them.** Develop data flow maps and isolate a CUI security domain using firewalls and controls to limit scope, then create an SSP documenting boundaries, environment, and requirements met/planned.

What is the primary objective of **EU AI Act**?

**The primary objective of the EU AI Act is to establish a risk-based regulatory framework that prohibits unacceptable-risk AI practices, imposes strict obligations on high-risk AI systems, mandates transparency for limited-risk systems, and fosters trustworthy AI while ensuring safety, fundamental rights protection, and innovation.** Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, effective 1 August 2024, classifies AI into unacceptable, high, limited, and minimal risk tiers per Articles 5-6, Annexes I-III.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **EU AI Act**?

**Providers, deployers, importers, distributors, and authorized representatives of AI systems used in or outputting to the EU must comply with the EU AI Act, regardless of location.** Providers develop/place high-risk systems on the market (Article 3(3)); deployers are professional users (Article 3(4)). Scope captures third-country entities via EU output nexus (Article 2), with GPAI providers facing Chapter V duties (Articles 51-56).

Does **EU AI Act** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**High-risk AI systems require conformity assessment, which may involve third-party notified bodies for certain Annex III uses or when harmonized standards are unavailable, leading to EU Declaration of Conformity (Article 47) and CE marking (Article 48).** Internal assessments suffice under Annex VI for others (Article 43); notified bodies issue certificates (Article 44) and conduct surveillance audits (Articles 28-39).

How often should an assessment for **EU AI Act** be performed?

**Conformity assessments for high-risk AI must be performed before placing on the market or into service, with post-market monitoring continuous per Article 72, and re-assessments triggered by substantial modifications (Article 3(23)).** Logs retained at least 6 months (Article 19); serious incidents reported without delay (Article 73).

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **EU AI Act**?

**Non-compliance with the EU AI Act incurs tiered administrative fines up to 7% of worldwide annual turnover or €40 million for prohibited practices (Article 99), 4% or €20 million for high-risk obligations, and 2% or €10 million for others.** Additional remedies include market withdrawal, bans, and personal liability; enforced by national authorities and AI Office (Articles 70, 64).

Can **EU AI Act** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**No, the EU AI Act cannot be directly mapped to other international frameworks as it forms a standalone, directly applicable EU regulation without specified equivalences.** Compliance relies on its unique risk tiers, conformity processes, and phased timelines (e.g., prohibitions from February 2025), though synergies exist with EU laws like GDPR via integrated assessments.

What is the first step to begin implementing **EU AI Act**?

**The first step to implement the EU AI Act is to conduct an AI inventory and classify all systems/models by risk tier, screening for Article 5 prohibitions and Article 6 high-risk status under Annexes I-III.** Document classifications and map roles (provider/deployer) to prioritize obligations like RMS (Article 9).

NIST 800-171 vs EU AI Act

Standards Comparison

NIST 800-171

Mandatory

2020

U.S. standard protecting CUI in nonfederal systems

EU AI Act

Mandatory

2024

EU regulation for risk-based AI governance

Quick Verdict

NIST 800-171 mandates CUI protection for US contractors via controls and assessments, while EU AI Act regulates high-risk AI lifecycle with conformity and fines. Firms adopt NIST for DoD contracts; AI Act for EU market access and risk mitigation.

Controlled Unclassified Information

NIST 800-171

NIST SP 800-171: Protecting CUI in Nonfederal Systems

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Tailored controls protecting CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems
Mandates SSP and POA&M for implementation documentation
Scoped applicability to CUI components and security enclaves
Contractually enforced via DFARS 252.204-7012 for DoD
Revision 3 adds supply chain and planning families

Artificial Intelligence

EU AI Act

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 Artificial Intelligence Act

Cost

€€€

Complexity

Medium

Implementation Time

18-24 months

Key Features

Risk-based four-tier AI classification system
Prohibitions on unacceptable-risk AI practices
High-risk conformity assessments and CE marking
GPAI systemic risk evaluations and reporting
Post-market monitoring and incident reporting

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 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 applies to components processing, storing, or transmitting CUI, emphasizing risk-based scoping via enclaves.

Key Components

17 families (r3) including Access Control, Audit, new Supply Chain Risk Management
~97 requirements with Organization-Defined Parameters
SSP and POA&M for documenting implementation/remediation
SP 800-171A r3 assessment procedures (examine/interview/test)
Mappings to SP 800-53, ISO 27001, NIST CSF

Why Organizations Use It

Federal contractors implement for DFARS 252.204-7012 compliance, enabling DoD contracts. Reduces breach risks, ensures CMMC Level 2 readiness, builds stakeholder trust via SPRS scores. Strategic benefits include supply chain resilience and competitive procurement edge.

Implementation Overview

Phased approach: scope CUI boundaries, gap analysis, control deployment (MFA, SIEM), evidence collection. Applies to contractors handling CUI; 6-18 months typical. Self/third-party assessments required for contracts.

EU AI Act Details

What It Is

The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) is a comprehensive regulation establishing the first horizontal framework for AI in the EU. It entered into force on 1 August 2024 with phased applicability. Its primary purpose is to ensure AI safety, transparency, and fundamental rights protection across sectors via a **risk-based approachprohibiting unacceptable risks, regulating high-risk systems, transparency for limited-risk, and minimal rules for others.

Key Components

Four risk tiers with obligations like risk management (Art. 9), data governance (Art. 10), documentation (Arts. 11-13), human oversight (Art. 14), cybersecurity (Art. 15).
Prohibitions (Art. 5), high-risk conformity assessments, CE marking, EU database registration.
GPAI rules (Chapter V) for foundation models, including systemic risk duties.
Built on product-safety principles; compliance via self/third-party assessment, fines up to 7% global turnover.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for EU-market AI to avoid penalties, market exclusion.
Enhances risk management, trust, competitiveness in regulated sectors like healthcare, finance.
Builds stakeholder confidence through transparency and accountability.

Implementation Overview

Phased: inventory/classify AI, build RMS/QMS, conformity assessments, post-market monitoring.
Applies to providers/deployers globally if EU outputs used; cross-functional for all sizes.
No universal certification but notified bodies for high-risk; audits ongoing. (178 words)

Key Differences

Aspect	NIST 800-171	EU AI Act
Scope	CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems	Risk-based AI systems lifecycle governance
Industry	US federal contractors, defense supply chain	All sectors using AI in EU market
Nature	Contractual cybersecurity requirements	Mandatory EU regulation with fines
Testing	SP 800-171A examine/interview/test assessments	Conformity assessments, notified bodies
Penalties	Contract loss, CMMC ineligibility	Up to 7% global turnover fines

Scope

NIST 800-171

CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems

EU AI Act

Risk-based AI systems lifecycle governance

Industry

NIST 800-171

US federal contractors, defense supply chain

EU AI Act

All sectors using AI in EU market

Nature

NIST 800-171

Contractual cybersecurity requirements

EU AI Act

Mandatory EU regulation with fines

Testing

NIST 800-171

SP 800-171A examine/interview/test assessments

EU AI Act

Conformity assessments, notified bodies

Penalties

NIST 800-171

Contract loss, CMMC ineligibility

EU AI Act

Up to 7% global turnover fines

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about NIST 800-171 and EU AI Act

NIST 800-171 FAQ

EU AI Act FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

CMMC Sustainment Mastery: Continuous Monitoring, Annual Affirmations, and Subcontractor Flow-Down Playbook

Master CMMC sustainment beyond certification: continuous monitoring dashboards, SPRS/eMASS affirmations, enforceable subcontractor clauses. Get templates for ve

Unpacking the True Cost: A Guide to Calculating TCO for Modern Compliance Monitoring Software

Unpack the true Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for compliance monitoring software. Factor in licenses, implementation, training, maintenance, and ROI savings for

Using CIS Controls v8.1 as a ‘Compliance On-Ramp’: Map One Security Program to NIST CSF, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, and NIS2

Use CIS Controls v8.1 as your compliance on-ramp. Map one security program to NIST CSF, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, and NIS2 without duplicating work via practical mapp

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

ISA 95 vs ISO 27017

Compare ISA 95 vs ISO 27017: ISA-95 hierarchies ERP-MES via Purdue levels & models; ISO 27017 adds cloud controls to 27001 for shared security. Secure IT/OT now!

MAS TRM vs SAMA CSF

Compare MAS TRM vs SAMA CSF: Decode Singapore & Saudi cyber frameworks for FIs. Master governance, controls, resilience & compliance gaps. Boost your strategy now!

NIST 800-171 vs ISO 22301

NIST 800-171 vs ISO 22301: Cybersecurity for CUI protection meets business continuity resilience. Uncover key differences, synergies & compliance strategies for DoD contractors. Boost defenses now!

NIST 800-171

EU AI Act

Quick Verdict

NIST 800-171

Key Features

EU AI Act

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

NIST 800-171 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

EU AI Act Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

NIST 800-171 FAQ

What is the primary objective of NIST 800-171?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with NIST 800-171?

Does NIST 800-171 require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for NIST 800-171 be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with NIST 800-171?

An NIST 800-171 be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing NIST 800-171?

EU AI Act FAQ

What is the primary objective of EU AI Act?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with EU AI Act?

Does EU AI Act require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for EU AI Act be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with EU AI Act?

Can EU AI Act be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing EU AI Act?

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

CMMC Sustainment Mastery: Continuous Monitoring, Annual Affirmations, and Subcontractor Flow-Down Playbook

Unpacking the True Cost: A Guide to Calculating TCO for Modern Compliance Monitoring Software

Using CIS Controls v8.1 as a ‘Compliance On-Ramp’: Map One Security Program to NIST CSF, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, and NIS2

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

ISA 95 vs ISO 27017

MAS TRM vs SAMA CSF

NIST 800-171 vs ISO 22301