Cross-Framework Mapping

AWS Well-Architected Security PillarvsFedRAMP Moderate

See exactly how AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls map to FedRAMP Moderate. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

6
Controls Mapped
83
Gaps Found
4%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which FedRAMP Moderate controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar maps to FedRAMP Moderate with 4% coverage across 4 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 89 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls identifies 85 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Identity & Access Management.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 89 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 6 of 6 mapped controls across 2 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

Cloud Security Overview(4 mappings)

AWS-WA-01Shared responsibility model definition
CA-9Internal System Connections
AWS-WA-03Cloud risk assessment2 targets
IR-2Incident Response and Recovery
RA-1Policy and Procedures
AWS-WA-04Regulatory compliance for cloud services
AC-2Account Management

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar: Cloud Operations & Monitoring(2 mappings)

AWS-WA-21Cloud security monitoring and logging2 targets
CA-8Penetration Testing
IR-4Incident Handling
Coverage crosswalk

The AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar to FedRAMP Moderate crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which FedRAMP Moderate controls your existing AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

Coverage does not run both ways. AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar into FedRAMP Moderate lands at 23.5%, while FedRAMP Moderate into AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar lands at 69.8%, on the same two control sets. That is not a rounding difference. It is the whole reason these are two separate reports: one asks what your AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar evidence buys you for FedRAMP Moderate, the other asks the reverse.

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar into FedRAMP Moderate
23.5%

76 of 323 FedRAMP Moderate controls are evidenced by work you have already done for AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar. 247 are genuine gaps.

32.6%AC - Access Control
48.1%CM - Configuration Management
45.8%SI - System and Information Integrity
31%SC - System and Communications Protection
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 184 candidate mappings were examined and 1 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: AC-17(1) Monitoring and Control

Automated session tooling with restricted interactive access monitors and controls remote access.

Grounded in SEC06-BP03 Reduce manual management and interactive access. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: AC-1 Policy and Procedures

Develop and disseminate access control policy and procedures; review at least annually (FedRAMP parameter); update following defined events.

Every one of the 76 evidenced controls and 247 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

FedRAMP Moderate into AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar
69.8%

44 of 63 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls are evidenced by work you have already done for FedRAMP Moderate. 19 are genuine gaps.

60%Identity & Access Management
72.7%Data Protection
77.8%Infrastructure Protection
75%Application Security
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 108 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP01 Identify key personnel and external resources

The incident response plan defines roles, responsibilities and contacts for responders

Grounded in IR-8 Incident Response Plan. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP03 Prepare forensic capabilities

Pre-provision a forensic account, isolated VPC, tooling AMIs, IAM roles and EBS snapshot procedures so responders can acquire and analyse evidence quickly.

Every one of the 44 evidenced controls and 19 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar to FedRAMP Moderate
$299
per framework pair, one time
  • 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 4% in the header counts how many AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many FedRAMP Moderate 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.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 686 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$149/month

Professional

  • Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • Unlimited full-text search
  • Framework self-assessment
  • PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

What are the key differences between AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar and FedRAMP Moderate?

AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar has 89 controls across its framework, while FedRAMP Moderate covers 238 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 4 overlapping controls (4% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Identity & Access Management, where 15 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls have no direct FedRAMP Moderate equivalent.

How many controls map between AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar and FedRAMP Moderate?

Of 89 total AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls, 4 map directly to FedRAMP Moderate controls, representing 4% coverage. The remaining 85 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar to FedRAMP Moderate?

85 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls have no direct equivalent in FedRAMP Moderate. The highest concentration of gaps is in Identity & Access Management with 15 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 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar and FedRAMP Moderate?

The domain with the highest gap count is Identity & Access Management (15 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

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.