Cross-Framework Mapping

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1vsNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

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

295
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
90%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 with 90% coverage across 177 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 197 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls identifies 20 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in CEK - Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 197 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 295 mapped controls across 17 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.

A&A - Audit & Assurance(10 mappings)

CCM-A&A-01Audit and Assurance Policy and Procedures
→NIST-CSF-GV.PO-01Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is established based on organizational context, cybersecurity strategy, and priorities and is communicated and enforced
CCM-A&A-02Independent Assessments2 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-02Improvements are identified from security tests and exercises, including those done in coordination with suppliers and relevant third parties
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-09The authenticity and integrity of hardware and software are assessed prior to acquisition and use
CCM-A&A-03Risk Based Planning Assessment
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-05Threats, vulnerabilities, likelihoods, and impacts are used to understand inherent risk and inform risk response prioritization
CCM-A&A-04Requirements Compliance
→NIST-CSF-GV.OC-03Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements regarding cybersecurity - including privacy and civil liberties obligations - are understood and managed
CCM-A&A-05Audit Management Process2 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-02Improvements are identified from security tests and exercises, including those done in coordination with suppliers and relevant third parties
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-08Processes for receiving, analyzing, and responding to vulnerability disclosures are established
CCM-A&A-06Remediation3 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.RM-07Strategic opportunities (i.e., positive risks) are characterized and are included in organizational cybersecurity risk discussions
→NIST-CSF-ID.IM-02Improvements are identified from security tests and exercises, including those done in coordination with suppliers and relevant third parties
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-06Risk responses are chosen, prioritized, planned, tracked, and communicated

AIS - Application & Interface Security(10 mappings)

CCM-AIS-01Application and Interface Security Policy and Procedures2 targets
→NIST-CSF-GV.PO-01Policy for managing cybersecurity risks is established based on organizational context, cybersecurity strategy, and priorities and is communicated and enforced
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated, and their performance is monitored throughout the software development life cycle
CCM-AIS-02Application Security Baseline Requirements
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-01Configuration management practices are established and applied
CCM-AIS-03Application Security Metrics
→NIST-CSF-GV.OV-03Organizational cybersecurity risk management performance is evaluated and reviewed for adjustments needed
CCM-AIS-04Secure Application Design and Development
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated, and their performance is monitored throughout the software development life cycle
CCM-AIS-05Automated Application Security Testing2 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated, and their performance is monitored throughout the software development life cycle
CCM-AIS-06Automated Secure Application Deployment
→NIST-CSF-PR.PS-06Secure software development practices are integrated, and their performance is monitored throughout the software development life cycle
CCM-AIS-07Application Vulnerability Remediation2 targets
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-01Vulnerabilities in assets are identified, validated, and recorded
→NIST-CSF-ID.RA-06Risk responses are chosen, prioritized, planned, tracked, and communicated

+275 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 868 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

The Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NIST Cybersecurity Framework 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.

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 into NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
51.9%

55 of 106 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1. 51 are genuine gaps.

NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 into Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1
51.3%

101 of 197 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. 96 are genuine gaps.

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 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 90% 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 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

Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 868 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
  • ✓ 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 has 197 controls across its framework, while NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 106 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 177 overlapping controls (90% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in CEK - Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management, where 14 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls have no direct NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 equivalent.

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

Of 197 total Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls, 177 map directly to NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 controls, representing 90% coverage. The remaining 20 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

20 Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 controls have no direct equivalent in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in CEK - Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management with 14 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 NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is CEK - Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management (14 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.