Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO 27017:2015vsISO 19011:2018

See exactly how ISO 27017:2015 controls map to ISO 19011:2018. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

8
Controls Mapped
33
Gaps Found
12%
Coverage

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:

ISO 27017:2015 maps to ISO 19011:2018 with 12% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 41 ISO 27017:2015 controls identifies 37 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Operations security – ISO 27017:2015.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 41 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 8 of 8 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

Operations security – ISO 27017:2015(3 mappings)

iso-27017-2015::12.3Backup3 targets
iso-19011-2018::6.4.3Conducting opening meeting
iso-19011-2018::6.7Conducting audit follow-up
iso-19011-2018::7.2.3Knowledge and skills

Cloud sector-specific concepts – ISO 27017:2015(1 mappings)

iso-27017-2015::4.4Managing information security risks in cloud services
iso-19011-2018::5.5.7Managing and maintaining audit programme records

Information security policies – ISO 27017:2015(1 mappings)

iso-27017-2015::5.1Management direction for information security
iso-19011-2018::5.5.7Managing and maintaining audit programme records

Human resource security – ISO 27017:2015(2 mappings)

iso-27017-2015::7.2During employment2 targets
iso-19011-2018::6.5.2Distributing audit report
iso-19011-2018::7.2Determining auditor competence

Clause 9 – ISO 27017:2015(1 mappings)

iso-27017-2015::9.4System and application access control
iso-19011-2018::6.4.5Audit information availability and access
Coverage crosswalk

A ISO 27017:2015 to ISO 19011:2018 crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO 19011:2018 controls your existing ISO 27017:2015 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

ISO 27017:2015 into ISO 19011:2018
Not published yet

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.

ISO 19011:2018 into ISO 27017:2015
Not published yet

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.

ISO 27017:2015 to ISO 19011:2018 (built to order)
$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 12% in the header counts how many ISO 27017:2015 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO 19011:2018 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.

Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets

AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.

$0/forever

Free

  • 686 framework browser
  • Cross-framework mappings (310K+)
  • 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 ISO 27017:2015 and ISO 19011:2018?

ISO 27017:2015 has 41 controls across its framework, while ISO 19011:2018 covers 55 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (12% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Operations security – ISO 27017:2015, where 6 ISO 27017:2015 controls have no direct ISO 19011:2018 equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO 27017:2015 and ISO 19011:2018?

Of 41 total ISO 27017:2015 controls, 5 map directly to ISO 19011:2018 controls, representing 12% coverage. The remaining 37 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27017:2015 to ISO 19011:2018?

37 ISO 27017:2015 controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 19011:2018. The highest concentration of gaps is in Operations security – ISO 27017:2015 with 6 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 27017:2015 and ISO 19011:2018?

The domain with the highest gap count is Operations security – ISO 27017:2015 (6 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.