Cross-Framework Mapping

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1vsCMMC 2.0

See exactly how Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls map to CMMC 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

190
Controls Mapped
7
Gaps Found
61%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which CMMC 2.0 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 maps to CMMC 2.0 with 61% coverage across 121 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 197 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls identifies 76 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency & Accountability.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 197 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 190 mapped controls across 16 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

A&A - Audit & Assurance(7 mappings)

CCM-A&A-02Independent Assessments
CA.L2-3.12.1Security Control Assessment
CCM-A&A-03Risk Based Planning Assessment3 targets
CA.L2-3.12.1Security Control Assessment
CA.L2-3.12.3Security Control Monitoring
RA.L2-3.11.1Risk Assessments
CCM-A&A-04Requirements Compliance
CA.L2-3.12.4System Security Plan
CCM-A&A-05Audit Management Process
CA.L2-3.12.3Security Control Monitoring
CCM-A&A-06Remediation
CA.L2-3.12.2Plan of Action

AIS - Application & Interface Security(5 mappings)

CCM-AIS-02Application Security Baseline Requirements
CM.L2-3.4.2Security Configuration Enforcement
CCM-AIS-04Secure Application Design and Development
SC.L2-3.13.2Security Engineering
CCM-AIS-05Automated Application Security Testing
RA.L2-3.11.2Vulnerability Scan
CCM-AIS-07Application Vulnerability Remediation2 targets
RA.L2-3.11.3Vulnerability Remediation
SI.L2-3.14.1Flaw Remediation

BCR - Business Continuity Management & Operational Resilience(5 mappings)

CCM-BCR-02Risk Assessment and Impact Analysis
RA.L2-3.11.1Risk Assessments
CCM-BCR-07Communication
IR.L2-3.6.2Incident Reporting
CCM-BCR-08Backup
MP.L2-3.8.9Protect Backups
CCM-BCR-09Disaster Response Plan
IR.L2-3.6.1Incident Handling
CCM-BCR-10Response Plan Exercise
IR.L2-3.6.3Incident Response Testing

CCC - Change Control & Configuration Management(3 mappings)

CCM-CCC-01Change Management Policy and Procedures
CM.L2-3.4.3System Change Management
CCM-CCC-02Quality Testing
CM.L2-3.4.4Security Impact Analysis
CCM-CCC-03Change Management Technology
CM.L2-3.4.3System Change Management

+170 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

Coverage crosswalk

The Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 to CMMC 2.0 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which CMMC 2.0 controls your existing Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 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. Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 into CMMC 2.0 lands at 48.2%, while CMMC 2.0 into Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 lands at 31%, 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 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 evidence buys you for CMMC 2.0, the other asks the reverse.

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 into CMMC 2.0
48.2%

53 of 110 CMMC 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1. 57 are genuine gaps.

50%System and Communications Protection
77.8%Audit and Accountability
27.3%Access Control
66.7%Configuration Management
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 143 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. This pair was additionally re-checked after CSA CCM v4.0.1 was rebuilt from the CAIQ v4.0.1 source on 2026-08-19: its mappings were originally judged when CCM carried no requirement text, a sample of 70 across the 21 CCM pairs found about 80 percent holding cleanly, and the two identified errors were corrected before release.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: AC.L2-3.1.1 Authorized Access Control

User access provisioning limits system access to authorized users.

Grounded in CCM-IAM-06 User Access Provisioning. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: AC.L2-3.1.11 Session Termination

Automatically end a user session once a defined condition, such as an inactivity period or maximum session duration, is met.

Every one of the 53 evidenced controls and 57 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

CMMC 2.0 into Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1
31%

61 of 197 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for CMMC 2.0. 136 are genuine gaps.

62.5%IAM - Identity & Access Management
69.2%LOG - Logging & Monitoring
33.3%DCS - Datacenter Security
38.5%HRS - Human Resources Security
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 128 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. This pair was additionally re-checked after CSA CCM v4.0.1 was rebuilt from the CAIQ v4.0.1 source on 2026-08-19: its mappings were originally judged when CCM carried no requirement text, a sample of 70 across the 21 CCM pairs found about 80 percent holding cleanly, and the two identified errors were corrected before release.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: CCM-A&A-03 Risk Based Planning Assessment

Periodically assessing controls to determine effectiveness is risk based assessment.

Grounded in CA.L2-3.12.1 Security Control Assessment. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: CCM-A&A-01 Audit and Assurance Policy and Procedures

Maintain approved audit and assurance policies, procedures and standards that are documented, communicated to the staff they bind, applied in practice, and reassessed at least once a year.

Every one of the 61 evidenced controls and 136 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 to CMMC 2.0
$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 61% in the header counts how many Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many CMMC 2.0 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 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 and CMMC 2.0?

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 has 197 controls across its framework, while CMMC 2.0 covers 110 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 121 overlapping controls (61% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency & Accountability, where 12 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls have no direct CMMC 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 and CMMC 2.0?

Of 197 total Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls, 121 map directly to CMMC 2.0 controls, representing 61% coverage. The remaining 76 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 to CMMC 2.0?

76 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls have no direct equivalent in CMMC 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency & Accountability with 12 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 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 and CMMC 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency & Accountability (12 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.