ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset ProtectionvsISO 27002:2022
See exactly how ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls map to ISO 27002:2022. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection maps to ISO 27002:2022 with 50% coverage across 37 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 74 ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls identifies 60 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Annex A: The management system (guidance for incorporation into SPC.1-2009) – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 74 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 43 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.
Clause 5: Leadership and governance – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection(1 mappings)
Clause 6: Establishing the framework – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection(1 mappings)
Annex A: The management system (guidance for incorporation into SPC.1-2009) – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection(7 mappings)
Annex B: The elements of physical asset protection – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection(11 mappings)
+23 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 868 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection to ISO 27002:2022 crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO 27002:2022 controls your existing ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 50% in the header counts how many ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO 27002:2022 controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection comparisons
Other ISO 27002:2022 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 868 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection and ISO 27002:2022?
ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection has 74 controls across its framework, while ISO 27002:2022 covers 93 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 37 overlapping controls (50% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Annex A: The management system (guidance for incorporation into SPC.1-2009) – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection, where 28 ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls have no direct ISO 27002:2022 equivalent.
How many controls map between ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection and ISO 27002:2022?
Of 74 total ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls, 37 map directly to ISO 27002:2022 controls, representing 50% coverage. The remaining 60 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection to ISO 27002:2022?
60 ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27002:2022. The highest concentration of gaps is in Annex A: The management system (guidance for incorporation into SPC.1-2009) – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection with 28 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection and ISO 27002:2022?
The domain with the highest gap count is Annex A: The management system (guidance for incorporation into SPC.1-2009) – ANSI/ASIS PAP.1-2012 Physical Asset Protection (28 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.