Cross-Framework Mapping

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0vsModern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia)

See exactly how CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls map to Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

25
Controls Mapped
10
Gaps Found
26%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 maps to Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia) with 26% coverage across 11 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 35 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls identifies 28 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Device Security.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 35 controls analysed | 715 frameworks | 414K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 25 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 414K+ mappings across 715 frameworks.

Account Security(6 mappings)

CPG-1.AChanging Default Passwords3 targets
BIPA-SEC5-1Biometric Identifier Definition
BIPA-SEC5-2Biometric Information Definition
NAIC-668-3Definitions
CPG-1.CUnique Credentials3 targets
BIPA-SEC5-1Biometric Identifier Definition
BIPA-SEC5-2Biometric Information Definition
NAIC-668-3Definitions

Data Security(2 mappings)

CPG-3.ALog Collection
NAIC-668-3Definitions
CPG-3.BSecure Log Storage
NAIC-668-3Definitions

Governance & Training(3 mappings)

CPG-4.CBasic Cybersecurity Training3 targets
BIPA-SEC5-1Biometric Identifier Definition
BIPA-SEC5-2Biometric Information Definition
NAIC-668-3Definitions

Governance and Training(3 mappings)

CPG-4.CBasic Cybersecurity Training3 targets
BIPA-SEC5-1Biometric Identifier Definition
BIPA-SEC5-2Biometric Information Definition
NAIC-668-3Definitions

Vulnerability Management(1 mappings)

CPG-5.AVulnerability Disclosure Program
MSA-16-1dCriterion 4: Actions Taken

Supply Chain(2 mappings)

CPG-6.AVendor and Supplier Incident Reporting2 targets
MSA-16-1bCriterion 2: Structure, Operations and Supply Chains
MSA-16-1cCriterion 3: Modern Slavery Risks

Supply Chain and Third Party(3 mappings)

CPG-6.AVendor and Supplier Incident Reporting2 targets
MSA-16-1bCriterion 2: Structure, Operations and Supply Chains
MSA-16-1cCriterion 3: Modern Slavery Risks
CPG-6.BSupply Chain Incident Reporting
7012(a)Definitions

+5 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 715 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever — no credit card required

Related Comparisons

Other CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 comparisons

Other Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia) comparisons

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 715 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 715 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (414K+)
  • 824 compliance assessments
  • 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/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 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia)?

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 has 35 controls across its framework, while Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia) covers 41 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 11 overlapping controls (26% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Device Security, where 8 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia) equivalent.

How many controls map between CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia)?

Of 35 total CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls, 11 map directly to Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia) controls — representing 26% coverage. The remaining 28 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 to Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia)?

28 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia). The highest concentration of gaps is in Device Security with 8 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 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and Modern Slavery Act 2018 (Australia)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Device Security (8 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.