Organizations today must establish security programs to manage cybersecurity risks, meet regulatory or contractual obligations, and demonstrate trust to customers, partners, and regulators. 

Security frameworks offer a blueprint for these programs so organizations don’t have to start from scratch or rely on ad-hoc processes. 

Rather than prescribing a single “right” approach, these frameworks offer structured approaches to security that vary by data type or sensitivity, industry, geographical location, and customer requirements. While some define governance principles, others specify technical controls, and some set minimum requirements for meeting regulatory or contractual obligations.

This overview explains how 15 of the most common security frameworks differ, what each is designed to accomplish, and how organizations typically decide which ones apply to them.

What is a security framework?

A security framework provides a structured approach to managing information security risk and meeting security and privacy requirements. It defines a set of policies, procedures, processes, best practices, outcomes, and/or assessment objectives and criteria used to protect systems and the data they contain.

Security frameworks are often confused with to-do lists that can be checked off for a single customer or audit and then forgotten about. In practice, they serve broader purposes and have more lasting impacts, helping organizations:

• Establish a baseline for security controls tailored to specific sectors, types of data, threat models, and maturity levels
• Support audits, certifications, or regulatory requirements
• Align security programs with business objectives and risk management goals
• Provide a common language for internal teams, customers, and regulators
• Establish best practices in day-to-day operations and a culture of security

These are just a few reasons why frameworks are not “one-and-done” checklists. They are designed to be implemented, monitored, and refined as threats, technologies, and regulatory and customer expectations change over time.

15 common security frameworks

Find a quick overview of common frameworks and standards, including how organizations typically demonstrate alignment, in the table below. Then keep reading for a more detailed overview of each.

While security frameworks are often discussed as a single category, they can be grouped into types based on the role they serve. Understanding these types helps clarify how frameworks differ, when they’re typically adopted, and why organizations frequently implement more than one over time.

The frameworks below are categorized into the following types:

• Certification and attestation frameworks are assessed by independent auditors to provide assurance to third parties such as customers, partners, investors, and boards.
• Control catalogs and baselines define specific security and privacy controls organizations can implement and map across other frameworks.
• Governance and risk frameworks focus on aligning security programs with business objectives, risk tolerance, and oversight.
• Regulatory and industry standards impose legally or contractually enforceable security requirements tied to geography, industry, or data type.

Certification and attestation frameworks

SOC 2, ISO 27001, and CMMC are among the most widely recognized certification and attestation frameworks across the private and public sectors.

These frameworks are designed to provide independent assurance that an organization’s security controls are appropriately designed and operating effectively. The result is typically a report or certificate that can be shared with external stakeholders as proof of compliance.

In many cases, organizations without a current report or certification face friction—or outright disqualification—during the sales cycle or procurement process. Organizations with them, on the other hand, can assure customers of their commitment to protecting sensitive information and unlock opportunities upmarket, in regulated industries and the defense sector, and globally.

1. SOC 2

Systems and Organization Controls (SOC) 2 is a set of compliance criteria developed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). SOC 2 evaluates how organizations design and operate controls related to the Trust Services Criteria (security and/or availability, confidentiality, processing integrity, and privacy). 

• Who it’s for: Service organizations that handle customer data
• Focus: Provide third-party assurance that controls are in place to protect customer data

SOC 2 does not prescribe a single control set to meet these criteria. Instead, organizations define controls based on their systems, risk profile, and selected Trust Services Criteria, which are then evaluated by an independent auditor. These audits result in a SOC 2 report, which is commonly requested by customers and business partners during procurement, security reviews, renewals, or due diligence.

Learn more: SOC 2 requirements, audit process, and timelines →

Primary reference: AICPA SOC 2® overview 

2. ISO 27001

ISO/IEC 27001 is an international standard developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) for building, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS). 

• Who it’s for: Organizations that handle sensitive data of customers across globe
• Focus: Systematically and continuously managing information security risks 

An ISMS refers to all the people, processes, and technology used to keep information security risk at a minimum.

ISO 27001 compliance is commonly used to demonstrate that security practices are systematic and repeatable. Organizations can go one step further and pursue certification with an accredited certification body to assure customers and partners around the world that you are reliable and trustworthy.

Learn more: ISO 27001 requirements, certification process, and benefits →

Primary reference: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard overview

3. CMMC

The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) is an assessment framework created by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to ensure defense contractors and subcontractors have implemented the security requirements necessary to protect two specific types of sensitive but unclassified defense data known as Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). 

CMMC builds on federal cybersecurity requirements that already existed for these types of information with assessment requirements that map to three progressively advanced levels. This verification component is designed to provide the DoD with increased assurance that DIB organizations have actually implemented and are maintaining these requirements prior to awarding them contracts. In other words, CMMC certification is a condition of contract eligibility.

• Who it’s for: Defense contractors and subcontractors that handle FCI and/or CUI
• Focus: Enhancing protection of unclassified defense information at all tiers of supply chain

To improve the security and resilience of the entire defense sector, the DoD mandates that CMMC requirements are enforced through contracts and flow down from primes to subcontractors that handle FCI or CUI. 

Learn more: CMMC levels, benefits, and most recent changes →

Primary reference: Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program rule

Control catalogs and baselines

Control catalogs and baselines define specific security and privacy controls that organizations can implement to protect their systems and data. Rather than being certifiable like ISO 27001, these frameworks act as foundational building blocks for meeting other compliance requirements and strengthening an organization’s risk management program.

NIST SP 800-53 and NIST SP 800-171 are two of the most influential examples. NIST SP 800-53 provides a comprehensive catalog of over one thousand security and privacy controls that can be tailored to address a variety of threats, requirements, and computing systems. NIST SP 800-171 is a tailored subset of those controls focused on protecting controlled unclassified information (CUI) in nonfederal systems.

Because many frameworks build on or reference the same underlying controls, adopting one of these control catalogs early in the process of establishing your compliance program can make it easier to expand scope later.

4. NIST Special Publication 800-53

NIST Special Publication 800-53 is a comprehensive control catalog first developed by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in 1990 and revised over time. It lists security and privacy controls for all U.S. federal information systems (excluding national security systems).

Government agencies must implement NIST SP 800-53 to meet the minimum security requirements in FIPS 200 as mandated by the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA).

However, companies in nearly every industry can implement it to improve information security. In fact, many security frameworks were derived from NIST 800-53 or can be implemented using NIST 800-53 controls, including NIST 800-171, FedRAMP, CJIS  NIST CSF, and HITRUST.

• Who it’s for: Anyone (but especially U.S. federal agencies)
• Focus: Control implementation to manage risk and meet compliance requirements

Learn more: NIST 800-53 overview and why it’s gold standard for cybersecurity →

Primary reference: NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5

5. NIST Special Publication 800-171

NIST SP 800-171 defines 110 requirements for federal contractors and subcontractors that handle controlled unclassified information (CUI). Because this type of data is critical to U.S. national and economic security, these requirements are designed to keep CUI even when residing on or transiting through a contractor’s internal information system or network.

These requirements represent a small subset of NIST 800-53 controls that are necessary and directly related to protecting the confidentiality of CUI in non-federal systems and organizations. 

• Who it’s for: Federal contractors and subcontractors
• Focus: Safeguarding CUI and managing risks in contractor environments

Compliance with all NIST 800-171 requirements is typically mandated in any federal contract, but it is always mandated in contracts with the Department of Defense (DoD) that involve CUI. Previously, this was a requirement under DFARS clause 252.204-7012, but relied on defense contractors’ self-attestation of compliance. CMMC changes that by requiring pre-award verification of compliance.

Learn more: NIST 800-171 requirements, readiness steps, and relationship to other federal frameworks →

Primary reference: NIST Special Publication 800-571 Revision 3

Governance and risk frameworks

Governance and risk frameworks focus less on prescriptive requirements or controls and more on outcomes that can help organizations improve how they implement, manage, measure, and improve security over time.

NIST CSF, ISO 42001, and CIS Controls are widely-recognized frameworks used to formalize security and risk management programs, track maturity and improvement, and communicate efforts to leadership. These are frequently used alongside control catalogs and certification frameworks, rather than in isolation.

6. NIST CSF

The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (NIST CSF) was developed in response to a 2013 presidential initiative that called for the government and the private sector to collaborate in the fight against cyber risk. This collaboration resulted in a highly flexible and scalable framework that can help any organization identify gaps in their cybersecurity posture, prioritize improvements, and communicate progress to internal and external stakeholders.

• Who it’s for: Any organization looking to improve effectiveness of cyber risk management
• Focus: Comprehensive and personalized security weakness identification

While compliance with this framework is mandatory for federal agencies and contractors, organizations of any sector, size, or maturity level can use it to better understand and manage the common and unique risks they face now and over time. Many private sector organizations use it as a backbone for their security program and then map controls from other frameworks (like NIST 800-53 and NIST 800-171) to operationalize it.

Learn more: NIST CSF categories, tiers, and implementation tips →

Primary reference: NIST Cybersecurity Framework overview

How organizations typically select security frameworks

Most organizations do not choose security frameworks based on preference alone. Selection is usually driven by external requirements and risk exposure. 

Common drivers include:

• Customer and partner expectations (e.g., SOC 2 or ISO 27001 requests)
• Regulatory obligations tied to geography or industry (e.g., HIPAA, GDPR, CCPA)
• Government or defense contracts requiring specific standards (e.g., CMMC, NIST SP 800-53, FedRAMP)
• Risk exposure, which influences control depth (e.g., CIS controls for common risks and NIST CSF for common and unique risks)
• Public company governance and audit requirements (e.g., SOX)

Because these drivers evolve, many organizations expand their compliance scope over time rather than replacing one framework with another.

Implementing and maintaining security frameworks

Security frameworks are not interchangeable checklists. They’re prescribed or recommended controls and best practices that organizations use to manage risk, prove trust, and meet obligations tied to customers, regulators, and contracts. The right starting point depends on what data you handle, where you operate, and which stakeholders require proof of security.

Implementing security frameworks often requires coordinating people, processes, and technology across the organization. This may involve documentation, evidence collection, ongoing monitoring, and periodic assessments.

Many organizations use a combination of internal resources, external advisors, and technology platforms to manage these requirements efficiently over time. This is especially true as organizations mature and adopt multiple frameworks with overlapping controls. 

To learn more about how organizations operationalize security frameworks, read this complete guide or talk to an expert. 

This post was originally published in December 2021 and has been updated for comprehensiveness.