Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO 27001:2022vsPapua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016)

See exactly how ISO 27001:2022 controls map to Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

3
Controls Mapped
103
Gaps Found
3%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO 27001:2022 maps to Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016) with 3% coverage across 3 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 106 ISO 27001:2022 controls identifies 115 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in A.5 Organizational Controls.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 106 controls analysed | 706 frameworks | 324K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 3 of 3 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 324K+ mappings across 706 frameworks.

A.5 Organizational Controls(3 mappings)

ISO27001-A.5.24Incident response planning and readiness
PNGCYBER-4Incident Response, Investigation, Evidence Preservation, Data Retention
ISO27001-A.5.26Incident containment and remediation
PNGCYBER-4Incident Response, Investigation, Evidence Preservation, Data Retention
ISO27001-A.5.27Post-incident review and improvement
PNGCYBER-4Incident Response, Investigation, Evidence Preservation, Data Retention

Related Comparisons

Other ISO 27001:2022 comparisons

Other Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016) comparisons

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 706 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 706 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (324K+)
  • 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 →

What are the key differences between ISO 27001:2022 and Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016)?

ISO 27001:2022 has 106 controls across its framework, while Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016) covers 6 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 3 overlapping controls (3% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in A.5 Organizational Controls, where 36 ISO 27001:2022 controls have no direct Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016) equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO 27001:2022 and Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016)?

Of 106 total ISO 27001:2022 controls, 3 map directly to Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016) controls — representing 3% coverage. The remaining 115 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27001:2022 to Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016)?

115 ISO 27001:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016). The highest concentration of gaps is in A.5 Organizational Controls with 36 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 ISO 27001:2022 and Papua New Guinea National Cybersecurity Policy & Cybercrime Act (2016)?

The domain with the highest gap count is A.5 Organizational Controls (36 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.