AWS Well-Architected Security PillarvsISO 27001:2022
See exactly how AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls map to ISO 27001:2022. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which ISO 27001:2022 controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar maps to ISO 27001:2022 with 100% coverage across 63 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 63 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls identifies 0 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Application Security.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 63 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 144 mapped controls across 7 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
Security Foundations(20 mappings)
+124 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 686 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
The AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar to ISO 27001:2022 crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO 27001:2022 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 ISO 27001:2022 lands at 36.6%, while ISO 27001:2022 into AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar lands at 54%, 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 ISO 27001:2022, the other asks the reverse.
34 of 93 ISO 27001:2022 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar. 59 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Documented classification scheme with handling rules, owners and legal obligations is the artefact assessors test.
Grounded in SEC07-BP01 Understand your data classification scheme. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Write, approve and publish a top-level security policy plus topic-specific policies, and review them on a set cadence and after major change.
Every one of the 34 evidenced controls and 59 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
34 of 63 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls are evidenced by work you have already done for ISO 27001:2022. 29 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Incident roles and readiness planning names responders and external contacts.
Grounded in iso-27001-2022::5.24 Information security incident management planning and preparation. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Pre-provision the access incident responders need, using temporary credentials and prepared elevation paths so investigation is not delayed by access requests during an event.
Every one of the 34 evidenced controls and 29 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
- 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 100% 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 ISO 27001:2022 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 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar comparisons
Other ISO 27001:2022 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (309K+)
- ✓ 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 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar and ISO 27001:2022?
AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar has 63 controls across its framework, while ISO 27001:2022 covers 93 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 63 overlapping controls (100% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Application Security, where 0 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls have no direct ISO 27001:2022 equivalent.
How many controls map between AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar and ISO 27001:2022?
Of 63 total AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls, 63 map directly to ISO 27001:2022 controls, representing 100% coverage. The remaining 0 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 ISO 27001:2022?
0 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27001:2022. The highest concentration of gaps is in Application Security with 0 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 ISO 27001:2022?
The domain with the highest gap count is Application Security (0 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.