NIST 800-53
U.S. catalog of security and privacy controls for systems
SOX
U.S. law mandating internal controls and financial reporting integrity.
Quick Verdict
NIST 800-53 offers flexible security/privacy controls for federal and adopters managing CIA risks, while SOX mandates ICFR assessments for public firms ensuring financial accuracy. Companies use NIST for cybersecurity resilience; SOX for investor protection and governance.
NIST 800-53
NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 Security and Privacy Controls
Key Features
- 20 control families with 1,100+ outcome-based security/privacy controls
- Risk-based baselines (low/moderate/high + privacy) in SP 800-53B
- Tailoring and overlays for mission-specific customization
- Integrated with RMF for select/implement/assess/monitor lifecycle
- Machine-readable OSCAL format enabling automation
SOX
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Key Features
- Mandates ICFR assessment and auditor attestation (Section 404)
- Requires CEO/CFO personal certifications (Sections 302/906)
- Establishes PCAOB for audit firm oversight and standards
- Enforces auditor independence and rotation requirements
- Imposes criminal penalties for document tampering and fraud
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
NIST 800-53 Details
What It Is
NIST SP 800-53 Revision 5 is the U.S. federal government's primary catalog of security and privacy controls for information systems and organizations. This control-based framework protects confidentiality, integrity, availability, and privacy risks through a risk-informed, outcome-based approach integrated with the Risk Management Framework (RMF).
Key Components
- 20 control families (e.g., AC, AU, SR, PT) with over 1,100 base controls and enhancements.
- Baselines in SP 800-53B: low/moderate/high impact plus privacy baseline.
- Tailoring, parameters, overlays for customization; linked to SP 800-53A assessments.
- No formal certification; compliance via RMF authorization to operate (ATO).
Why Organizations Use It
- Meets FISMA/OMB A-130 mandates for federal systems/contractors.
- Enables risk management, reciprocity, and supply chain assurance.
- Builds trust, supports FedRAMP/cloud, and maps to ISO 27001/CSF.
- Drives resilience against diverse threats including privacy risks.
Implementation Overview
- Follow RMF: categorize, select/tailor baselines, implement, assess, authorize, monitor.
- Phased rollout with automation (OSCAL); suits all sizes, federal/non-federal.
- Requires governance, training, evidence collection; ongoing continuous monitoring.
SOX Details
What It Is
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) is a U.S. federal statute establishing corporate accountability standards for public companies. It mandates robust internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and accurate disclosures to protect investors post-scandals like Enron. SOX employs a risk-based approach via SEC rules and PCAOB standards.
Key Components
- **Three pillarsPCAOB oversight (Title I), auditor independence (Title II), executive certifications and ICFR (Titles III-IV).
- Core sections: §302/906 (CEO/CFO certifications), §404 (ICFR assessment/attestation), §409 (real-time disclosures).
- Built on COSO framework; no fixed controls, focuses on key risks.
- Compliance via annual management reports and auditor opinions.
Why Organizations Use It
- Mandatory for U.S. public issuers; reduces restatements, builds investor trust.
- Enhances governance, fraud deterrence, operational efficiency.
- Lowers cost of capital; aids M&A/IPO readiness.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: scoping, documentation, testing, monitoring using top-down risk assessment.
- Applies to public companies globally listing in U.S.; scales by size (exemptions for smaller filers).
- Requires external audits for most; ongoing continuous monitoring.
Key Differences
| Aspect | NIST 800-53 | SOX |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Security/privacy controls for systems | Financial reporting internal controls |
| Industry | Federal, contractors, any organization | Public companies, US-listed issuers |
| Nature | Voluntary catalog, risk-based tailoring | Mandatory federal law, SEC enforced |
| Testing | Continuous monitoring, SP 800-53A procedures | Annual ICFR assessment, auditor attestation |
| Penalties | No direct penalties, contract risks | Fines, imprisonment, civil liability |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about NIST 800-53 and SOX
NIST 800-53 FAQ
SOX FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
Your Compliance Command Center: How Modern Tools Orchestrate Cross-Departmental Adherence
Unlock your compliance command center with modern tools for real-time monitoring, automation & integrations across IT, HR, Legal & Finance. Slash non-compliance
The Panoramic View: How Integrated Compliance Monitoring Creates Unprecedented Organizational Visibility and Adaptability
Gain unprecedented organizational visibility with integrated compliance monitoring. Automate real-time alerts, ensure GDPR & SOC 2 adherence, reduce risks, and
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
OSHA vs ISO 27701
OSHA vs ISO 27701: Compare U.S. workplace safety standards with global privacy management systems. Achieve integrated compliance, cut risks, and drive efficiency. Discover strategies now!
AEO vs WELL
AEO vs WELL: Compare Authorized Economic Operator for secure trade facilitation vs WELL for healthier buildings. Criteria, benefits, implementation, ROI unpacked. Elevate compliance now!
EMAS vs SAMA CSF
Compare EMAS vs SAMA CSF: EU's premium eco-management scheme vs Saudi's financial cyber framework. Unlock compliance strategies, maturity insights & best practices. Dive in!