FedRAMP ModeratevsAzure Security Benchmark
See exactly how FedRAMP Moderate controls map to Azure Security Benchmark. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which Azure Security Benchmark controls you already evidence.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
FedRAMP Moderate maps to Azure Security Benchmark with 58% coverage across 186 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 323 FedRAMP Moderate controls identifies 137 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in PE - Physical and Environmental Protection.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 323 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 304 mapped controls across 16 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
AC - Access Control(20 mappings)
+284 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
The FedRAMP Moderate to Azure Security Benchmark crosswalk
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which Azure Security Benchmark controls your existing FedRAMP Moderate 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. FedRAMP Moderate into Azure Security Benchmark lands at 78.8%, while Azure Security Benchmark into FedRAMP Moderate lands at 34.7%, 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 FedRAMP Moderate evidence buys you for Azure Security Benchmark, the other asks the reverse.
67 of 85 Azure Security Benchmark controls are evidenced by work you have already done for FedRAMP Moderate. 18 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
A current component inventory with owners and defined information is the same requirement
Grounded in CM-8 System Component Inventory. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Limit user access to asset management features so assets cannot be modified accidentally or maliciously.
Every one of the 67 evidenced controls and 18 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
112 of 323 FedRAMP Moderate controls are evidenced by work you have already done for Azure Security Benchmark. 211 are genuine gaps.
A sample of what the report says
Documented identity and access guidance, policy and standards is the access control policy.
Grounded in ASBv3-GS-6 Define and implement identity and privileged access strategy. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.
Prevent further access by initiating device lock after 15 minutes inactivity (FedRAMP) or upon user request.
Every one of the 112 evidenced controls and 211 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.
- 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 58% in the header counts how many FedRAMP Moderate controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many Azure Security Benchmark 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 FedRAMP Moderate comparisons
Other Azure Security Benchmark comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (310K+)
- ✓ 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 FedRAMP Moderate and Azure Security Benchmark?
FedRAMP Moderate has 323 controls across its framework, while Azure Security Benchmark covers 85 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 186 overlapping controls (58% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in PE - Physical and Environmental Protection, where 19 FedRAMP Moderate controls have no direct Azure Security Benchmark equivalent.
How many controls map between FedRAMP Moderate and Azure Security Benchmark?
Of 323 total FedRAMP Moderate controls, 186 map directly to Azure Security Benchmark controls, representing 58% coverage. The remaining 137 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping FedRAMP Moderate to Azure Security Benchmark?
137 FedRAMP Moderate controls have no direct equivalent in Azure Security Benchmark. The highest concentration of gaps is in PE - Physical and Environmental Protection with 19 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 FedRAMP Moderate and Azure Security Benchmark?
The domain with the highest gap count is PE - Physical and Environmental Protection (19 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.