TheArtOfService
Cross-Framework Mapping

IEEE 1686vsOWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)

See exactly how IEEE 1686 controls map to OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

9
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
71%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

IEEE 1686 maps to OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) with 71% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 7 IEEE 1686 controls identifies 2 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in IEEE 1686 Section 5.4 - Communications.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 7 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 330K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 9 of 9 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 330K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

IEEE 1686 IR + Recovery + Reporting(3 mappings)

IEEE1686-IR-Recovery-Reporting-Exercises-Drills-RECOVIEEE 1686 - Incident Response + Recovery from Failed Update + Reporting to Authorities + Coordination with Sector-Specific Agencies + Exercises and Drills3 targets
→DSOMM-1Culture, Organization, Education, and Governance
→DSOMM-3Build, Deployment, Infrastructure Hardening, and Secrets Management
→DSOMM-4Test and Verification - SAST, DAST, IAST, SCA, Penetration Testing

IEEE 1686 Section 5.1 - Access Control(1 mappings)

IEEE1686-Section5.1-AccessControl-Accounts-Roles-Password-Session-RemoteIEEE 1686 Section 5.1 - Electronic Access Account Management + Roles + Password + Failed Login + Session + Remote Access + Personnel
→DSOMM-3Build, Deployment, Infrastructure Hardening, and Secrets Management

IEEE 1686 Section 5.2 + 5.3 - Audit Log + Monitoring(1 mappings)

IEEE1686-Section5.2-5.3-AuditLog-Retention-Export-MonitoringIEEE 1686 Section 5.2 + 5.3 - Audit Trail Records + Retention + Export + Supervisory Monitoring and Control + Network Security Monitoring
→DSOMM-5Information Gathering, Logging, Monitoring, and Incident Response

IEEE 1686 Section 5.5-5.8 - Firmware + Config + Time + Data(2 mappings)

IEEE1686-Section5.5-5.6-5.7-5.8-Firmware-ConfigSW-TimeSync-DataAtRestIEEE 1686 Section 5.5-5.8 - Firmware Quality + Configuration Software Security + Time Synchronisation + Data Protection at Rest + Patch + Malware + Hardening + Vulnerability2 targets
→DSOMM-3Build, Deployment, Infrastructure Hardening, and Secrets Management
→DSOMM-4Test and Verification - SAST, DAST, IAST, SCA, Penetration Testing

IEEE 1686 Section 6 + Supply Chain + Procurement + Physical(2 mappings)

IEEE1686-SupplyChain-Documentation-Procurement-ComplianceTable-PhysicalIEEE 1686 Section 6 IED Security Documentation + Supply Chain + Procurement Specification + Appendix A Compliance Table + Physical and Tamper2 targets
→DSOMM-3Build, Deployment, Infrastructure Hardening, and Secrets Management
→DSOMM-4Test and Verification - SAST, DAST, IAST, SCA, Penetration Testing

Related Comparisons

Other IEEE 1686 comparisons

IEEE 1686 vs IEC 624436 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs API 11646 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.06 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs ISO/IEC 27010:20156 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs NIST SP 800-171A Rev 3 - Assessing CUI Security Requirements5 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs ISO/IEC 27011:20245 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs FFIEC Cybersecurity Assessment Tool (CAT)5 mappingsIEEE 1686 vs IAEA Nuclear Security Series - Computer Security at Nuclear Facilities (NSS-17-T Rev 1)5 mappings

Other OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) comparisons

Azure Security Benchmark vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsAWS Well-Architected Security Pillar vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsISMAP (Japan) vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsNIST SP 800-146 vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsNIST SP 800-145 vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsNIST SP 800-144 vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsMTCS (Singapore) vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)6 mappingsLiechtenstein DPA vs OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)5 mappings

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • ✓ 718 framework browser
  • ✓ Cross-framework mappings (330K+)
  • ✓ 824 compliance assessments
  • ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Get Started Free
Recommended
$49/month

Professional

  • ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
  • ✓ Unlimited full-text search
  • ✓ Framework self-assessment
  • ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
Start 7-Day Free Trial →

Popular framework comparisons

NIST CSF vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs NIST CSFCMMC vs NIST 800-53FedRAMP vs NIST 800-53NIST CSF vs SOC 2HIPAA vs NIST 800-53ISO 27001 vs SOC 2ISO 27001 vs ISO 27701

What are the key differences between IEEE 1686 and OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)?

IEEE 1686 has 7 controls across its framework, while OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) covers 6 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (71% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in IEEE 1686 Section 5.4 - Communications, where 1 IEEE 1686 controls have no direct OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) equivalent.

How many controls map between IEEE 1686 and OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)?

Of 7 total IEEE 1686 controls, 5 map directly to OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM) controls — representing 71% coverage. The remaining 2 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping IEEE 1686 to OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)?

2 IEEE 1686 controls have no direct equivalent in OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM). The highest concentration of gaps is in IEEE 1686 Section 5.4 - Communications with 1 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 IEEE 1686 and OWASP DevSecOps Maturity Model (DSOMM)?

The domain with the highest gap count is IEEE 1686 Section 5.4 - Communications (1 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.

Related Resources

How to Map Controls Across Frameworks|Multi-Framework Compliance Guide|Compliance Glossary

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.