CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0vsTISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange
See exactly how CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls map to TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 maps to TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange with 57% coverage across 23 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 40 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls identifies 17 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Device Security.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 40 controls analysed | 693 frameworks | 819K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 43 mapped controls across 8 domains. Sign up to explore all 819K+ mappings across 693 frameworks.
Response and Recovery(8 mappings)
Account Security(5 mappings)
Device Security(2 mappings)
Data Security(5 mappings)
+23 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 693 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever — no credit card required
Related Comparisons
Other CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 comparisons
Other TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 693 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 693 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (819K+)
- ✓ 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 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange?
CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 has 40 controls across its framework, while TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange covers 47 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 23 overlapping controls (57% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Device Security, where 4 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange equivalent.
How many controls map between CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 and TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange?
Of 40 total CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls, 23 map directly to TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange controls — representing 57% coverage. The remaining 17 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 TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange?
17 CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls have no direct equivalent in TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange. The highest concentration of gaps is in Device Security with 4 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 TISAX — Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange?
The domain with the highest gap count is Device Security (4 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.