EU Cyber Resilience ActvsISO/IEC 29147:2018
See exactly how EU Cyber Resilience Act controls map to ISO/IEC 29147:2018. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
EU Cyber Resilience Act maps to ISO/IEC 29147:2018 with 3% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 164 EU Cyber Resilience Act controls identifies 221 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in The Regulation, its scope, definitions and dates – EU Cyber Resilience Act.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 164 controls analysed | 868 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 5 of 5 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 868 frameworks.
Annex I Part II vulnerability handling requirements – EU Cyber Resilience Act(2 mappings)
Annex II information and instructions to the user – EU Cyber Resilience Act(1 mappings)
Manufacturer obligations (Article 13) – EU Cyber Resilience Act(1 mappings)
Reporting of exploited vulnerabilities and severe incidents (Articles 14 and 15) – EU Cyber Resilience Act(1 mappings)
A EU Cyber Resilience Act to ISO/IEC 29147:2018 crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls your existing EU Cyber Resilience Act work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- 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 3% in the header counts how many EU Cyber Resilience Act controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO/IEC 29147:2018 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.
Related Comparisons
Other EU Cyber Resilience Act comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 29147:2018 comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 868 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 868 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 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 EU Cyber Resilience Act and ISO/IEC 29147:2018?
EU Cyber Resilience Act has 164 controls across its framework, while ISO/IEC 29147:2018 covers 93 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (3% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in The Regulation, its scope, definitions and dates – EU Cyber Resilience Act, where 27 EU Cyber Resilience Act controls have no direct ISO/IEC 29147:2018 equivalent.
How many controls map between EU Cyber Resilience Act and ISO/IEC 29147:2018?
Of 164 total EU Cyber Resilience Act controls, 5 map directly to ISO/IEC 29147:2018 controls, representing 3% coverage. The remaining 221 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping EU Cyber Resilience Act to ISO/IEC 29147:2018?
221 EU Cyber Resilience Act controls have no direct equivalent in ISO/IEC 29147:2018. The highest concentration of gaps is in The Regulation, its scope, definitions and dates – EU Cyber Resilience Act with 27 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 EU Cyber Resilience Act and ISO/IEC 29147:2018?
The domain with the highest gap count is The Regulation, its scope, definitions and dates – EU Cyber Resilience Act (27 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.