What is the primary objective of **SOC 2**?

**The primary objective of SOC 2 is to provide independent assurance that a service organization's controls are suitably designed and operating effectively to meet the Trust Services Criteria (TSC) for security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy.** Developed by the AICPA, SOC 2 evaluates systems handling customer data, with Security (CC1-CC9) as the mandatory common criteria. Type 2 reports assess operating effectiveness over 3-12 months, delivering stakeholder trust via CPA-attested reports.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **SOC 2**?

**No organization is legally required to comply with SOC 2, as it is a voluntary AICPA framework, but service organizations like SaaS, cloud, and data processors face professional mandates from enterprise clients.** Targeted at providers storing, processing, or transmitting customer data, it is demanded in RFPs, MSAs, and vendor risk assessments by Fortune 500 buyers, especially for deals over $5K ACV. Startups to enterprises (10-500+ employees) pursue it to avoid deal disqualification.

Does **SOC 2** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, SOC 2 requires an external audit by an independent AICPA-accredited CPA firm to issue Type 1 or Type 2 attestation reports.** Type 1 verifies control design at a point in time; Type 2 tests design and operating effectiveness over 3-12 months via sampling, walkthroughs, and evidence review (e.g., logs, pen tests). No formal certification exists—reports provide the assurance.

How often should an assessment for **SOC 2** be performed?

**SOC 2 Type 2 assessments should be performed annually to capture a full 12-month period of operating effectiveness.** Bridge letters from management extend validity up to 3 months between audits, confirming no material changes. Continuous monitoring supports recertification, with auditors verifying evidence like quarterly access reviews and annual pen tests.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **SOC 2**?

**Non-compliance with SOC 2 results in lost business opportunities, as 70-80% of enterprise SaaS deals require Type 2 reports, leading to RFP disqualification and extended sales cycles of 3-6 months.** Operational risks include heightened breach liability under laws like CCPA, reputational damage, and investor scrutiny; no AICPA fines apply, but contractual penalties and $1M+ incident costs escalate.

Can **SOC 2** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, SOC 2 controls map extensively to frameworks like ISO 27001 (80% overlap, 114 controls), NIST CSF, and GDPR (99 articles).** AICPA TSC spreadsheets enable reuse of Security (CC1-CC9) evidence, streamlining multi-compliance for global SaaS providers without dual audits.

What is the first step to begin implementing **SOC 2**?

**The first step to implement SOC 2 is a scoping exercise and gap analysis against the Trust Services Criteria, starting with mandatory Security (CC1-CC9).** Engage a CPA for readiness assessment ($5-10K), inventory assets/data flows, and prioritize 50-100 controls using tools like Vanta for mapping.

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.** It applies to components that process, store, transmit CUI, or provide protection for such components. Derived from SP 800-53 Moderate baseline, it ensures consistent safeguards via 14 families in r2 (110 requirements), expanded in r3 with families like Planning (PL) and Supply Chain Risk Management (SR).

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

**Nonfederal organizations handling CUI via federal contracts, grants, or agreements must implement NIST SP 800-171.** This includes DoD contractors and subcontractors under DFARS 252.204-7012 for covered contractor information systems processing Covered Defense Information (CDI). Applicability is contractual; agencies impose it for "adequate security" without FISMA federal obligations.

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.** Organizations develop a **System Security Plan (SSP)** documenting implementation and a **Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M)** for gaps. Assessments use SP 800-171A procedures (examine/interview/test); DoD may require SPRS scoring or CMMC Level 2, but the standard itself relies on self-described compliance.

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

**Organizations must perform and update NIST SP 800-171 assessments at planned intervals or after significant system changes.** SP 800-171A r3 supports scalable procedures; DoD requires annual SPRS reaffirmation for self-assessments. SSPs describe ongoing security assessments (3.12 family), with POA&Ms tracking remediation to maintain evidence of continuous monitoring.

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

**Non-compliance with NIST SP 800-171 risks contract ineligibility, termination, and remediation demands under DFARS 252.204-7012.** DoD uses SPRS scores (down to -203 possible) for sourcing; failures trigger 72-hour incident reporting, forensic support obligations, and potential False Claims Act liability. No direct NIST fines, but contractual breaches cause revenue loss and debarment.

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

**Yes, NIST SP 800-171 r2 Appendix D provides explicit mappings to NIST SP 800-53 and ISO 27001.** It aligns with NIST CSF categories (Identify/Protect/Detect/Respond/Recover). Organizations demonstrate compliance within existing programs, using tailoring for equivalency; FedRAMP Moderate often exceeds 800-171 for cloud inheritance.

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

**The first step is defining system scope by identifying components that process, store, transmit CUI, or protect them.** Use errata guidance for CUI security domains (enclaves with firewalls, flow controls). Develop initial SSP describing boundaries, then conduct gap analysis against requirements, prioritizing high-weight controls like Access Control and Audit.

SOC 2 vs NIST 800-171

Standards Comparison

SOC 2

Voluntary

2010

AICPA framework for service organizations' security controls

NIST 800-171

Mandatory

2020

U.S. framework for protecting CUI in nonfederal systems

Quick Verdict

SOC 2 provides voluntary Trust Services Criteria attestation for service organizations handling customer data, while NIST 800-171 mandates CUI protection requirements for federal contractors via DFARS. Companies adopt SOC 2 for market trust and NIST for contract eligibility.

Cybersecurity / Trust

SOC 2

System and Organization Controls 2

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

6-12 months

Key Features

Type 2 reports prove operating effectiveness over 3-12 months
Flexible Trust Services Criteria scoping beyond mandatory Security
Common Criteria CC1-CC9 as security foundation
Independent AICPA CPA firm attestation reports
Overlaps 80% with ISO 27001 and NIST frameworks

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 for CUI confidentiality in nonfederal systems
Requires SSP and POA&M for implementation documentation
Supports CUI enclave scoping and boundary isolation
17 control families including supply chain risk management
Integrates with DFARS contracts and CMMC assessments

Detailed Analysis

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

SOC 2 Details

What It Is

SOC 2 (System and Organization Controls 2) is a voluntary audit framework by the AICPA for service organizations handling customer data. It provides independent assurance via Trust Services Criteria (TSC)—Security (mandatory), Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy. Uses a risk-based approach with Type 1 (design at a point-in-time) and Type 2 (operating effectiveness over 3-12 months) reports.

Key Components

Five TSC, led by Common Criteria (CC1-CC9) under Security.
50-100 controls per scope, built on COSO principles.
Auditor tests design and operations; unqualified opinions ideal.
Annual recertification with bridge letters for continuity.

Why Organizations Use It

Accelerates enterprise sales by streamlining vendor due diligence (80-90% questionnaires answered).
Mitigates breach risks, liability under CCPA/SLAs.
Builds trust moat for SaaS/cloud providers; ROI in 3-6 months via higher ACVs.
Voluntary but market-mandated; overlaps ISO 27001, NIST, GDPR.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping/gap analysis (2-8 weeks), deployment/monitoring (3-6 months), CPA audit.
Automate evidence with Vanta/Drata; suits startups-enterprises in tech/fintech.
Focuses on IAM, logging, incident response; requires CPA fieldwork.

NIST 800-171 Details

What It Is

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-171 is a U.S. cybersecurity framework defining security requirements to protect the confidentiality of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) in nonfederal systems and organizations. Tailored from NIST SP 800-53 Moderate baseline, it employs a control-based, risk-commensurate approach for federal contractors and supply chains.

Key Components

110 requirements (Rev 2) across 14 families like Access Control, Audit, expanding to 17 in Rev 3 with Supply Chain Risk Management.
Core artifacts: System Security Plan (SSP), Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M).
Assessment via SP 800-171A procedures (examine/interview/test); supports tailoring and FedRAMP equivalence.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory via contracts like DFARS 252.204-7012 for DoD handling CUI.
Ensures contract eligibility, CMMC readiness, risk reduction against breaches.
Builds trust, competitive edge in federal procurement.

Implementation Overview

Phased: scoping CUI enclaves, gap analysis, controls, evidence.
Suits contractors/subcontractors; self/third-party assessments.
6-36 months based on size; high documentation focus.

Key Differences

Aspect	SOC 2	NIST 800-171
Scope	Trust Services Criteria: security, availability, confidentiality, privacy	CUI confidentiality protection in nonfederal systems, 14-17 families
Industry	SaaS, cloud, service providers; all sizes, US-centric	DoD contractors, federal supply chain; nonfederal CUI handlers
Nature	Voluntary AICPA attestation framework	Contractual NIST requirements via DFARS clauses
Testing	Type 1/2 CPA audits, 3-12 months operating effectiveness	SPRS scoring, CMMC assessments, SSP/POA&M validation
Penalties	Lost business, no legal fines	Contract ineligibility, penalties, debarment

Scope

SOC 2

Trust Services Criteria: security, availability, confidentiality, privacy

NIST 800-171

CUI confidentiality protection in nonfederal systems, 14-17 families

Industry

SOC 2

SaaS, cloud, service providers; all sizes, US-centric

NIST 800-171

DoD contractors, federal supply chain; nonfederal CUI handlers

Nature

SOC 2

Voluntary AICPA attestation framework

NIST 800-171

Contractual NIST requirements via DFARS clauses

Testing

SOC 2

Type 1/2 CPA audits, 3-12 months operating effectiveness

NIST 800-171

SPRS scoring, CMMC assessments, SSP/POA&M validation

Penalties

SOC 2

Lost business, no legal fines

NIST 800-171

Contract ineligibility, penalties, debarment

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about SOC 2 and NIST 800-171

SOC 2 FAQ

NIST 800-171 FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

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

CIS Controls v8.1 IG1 Ransomware-Resilience Sprint: A 30-60-90 Day Action Plan (With Evidence Checklist)

Tactical CIS Controls v8.1 IG1 playbook for ransomware resilience. 30-60-90 day sprint with tool-agnostic tasks, ownership & evidence checklists to prove progre

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

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

SAFe vs U.S. SEC Cybersecurity Rules

Compare SAFe vs U.S. SEC cybersecurity rules: Scale agile delivery with built-in compliance (GDPR, SOC 2, HIPAA) using Vanta & Atlassian. Boost velocity, governance. Discover now!

LGPD vs RoHS

Discover LGPD vs RoHS: Brazil's GDPR-like data law vs EU's hazardous substance rules. Unlock key differences, compliance strategies & global tips for seamless success.

CE Marking vs ISO 13485

Discover CE Marking vs ISO 13485: EU self-declaration for product safety (LVD, DoC) vs med device QMS (risk mgmt, validation). Key diffs, strategies for compliance success.

SOC 2

NIST 800-171

Quick Verdict

SOC 2

Key Features

NIST 800-171

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

SOC 2 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

NIST 800-171 Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

SOC 2 FAQ

What is the primary objective of SOC 2?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with SOC 2?

Does SOC 2 require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for SOC 2 be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with SOC 2?

Can SOC 2 be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing SOC 2?

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?

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

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

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

NIST CSF 2.0 Deep Dive: Mastering the Updated Framework Core Functions

CIS Controls v8.1 IG1 Ransomware-Resilience Sprint: A 30-60-90 Day Action Plan (With Evidence Checklist)

Your Compliance Command Center: How Modern Tools Orchestrate Cross-Departmental Adherence

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

SAFe vs U.S. SEC Cybersecurity Rules

LGPD vs RoHS

CE Marking vs ISO 13485