TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0vsSIG (Shared Assessments)

See exactly how CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls map to SIG (Shared Assessments). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

16
Controls Mapped
19
Gaps Found
34%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 maps to SIG (Shared Assessments) with 34% coverage across 13 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 35 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls identifies 26 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Device Security.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 35 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 16 of 16 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Account Security(3 mappings)

CPG-1.AChanging Default Passwords
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication
CPG-1.CUnique Credentials
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication
CPG-1.DRevoking Credentials for Departing Employees
→SHAREASSESS-4Vulnerability Management, Patching, Application Security

Device Security(4 mappings)

CPG-2.AAsset Inventory2 targets
→SHAREASSESS-1Information Governance and Risk
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication
CPG-2.BProhibit Connection of Unauthorized Devices2 targets
→SHAREASSESS-1Information Governance and Risk
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication

Data Security(2 mappings)

CPG-3.ALog Collection
→SHAREASSESS-3Network Security, Endpoint, Data Protection
CPG-3.BSecure Log Storage
→SHAREASSESS-3Network Security, Endpoint, Data Protection

Governance & Training(1 mappings)

CPG-4.CBasic Cybersecurity Training
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication

Governance and Training(1 mappings)

CPG-4.CBasic Cybersecurity Training
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication

Vulnerability Management(1 mappings)

CPG-5.AVulnerability Disclosure Program
→SHAREASSESS-4Vulnerability Management, Patching, Application Security

Supply Chain and Third Party(1 mappings)

CPG-6.BSupply Chain Incident Reporting
→SHAREASSESS-1Information Governance and Risk

Network Segmentation(3 mappings)

CPG-8.ANetwork Segmentation2 targets
→SHAREASSESS-2Access Control, Identity, Authentication
→SHAREASSESS-4Vulnerability Management, Patching, Application Security
CPG-8.CEncrypted DNS
→SHAREASSESS-3Network Security, Endpoint, Data Protection

Related Comparisons

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

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar14 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs Azure Security Benchmark14 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents13 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-171A - Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)13 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs AWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association)13 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-124 Revision 2 - Guidelines for Managing the Security of Mobile Devices13 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements12 mappingsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 vs ISO/IEC 27011:202412 mappings

Other SIG (Shared Assessments) comparisons

ISO 27043 vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsISO/IEC 27010:2015 vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsAzure Security Benchmark vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsAWWA Cybersecurity Guidance for the Water Sector (American Water Works Association) vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsISO/SAE 21434 vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsNIST SP 800-124 Revision 2 - Guidelines for Managing the Security of Mobile Devices vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsAWS Well-Architected Security Pillar vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappingsISO/IEC 27011:2024 vs SIG (Shared Assessments)4 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
  • ✓ 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 →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and SIG (Shared Assessments)?

CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 has 35 controls across its framework, while SIG (Shared Assessments) covers 8 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 13 overlapping controls (34% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Device Security, where 6 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct SIG (Shared Assessments) equivalent.

How many controls map between CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and SIG (Shared Assessments)?

Of 35 total CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls, 13 map directly to SIG (Shared Assessments) controls — representing 34% coverage. The remaining 26 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 SIG (Shared Assessments)?

26 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in SIG (Shared Assessments). The highest concentration of gaps is in Device Security with 6 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 SIG (Shared Assessments)?

The domain with the highest gap count is Device Security (6 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

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.