Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO/IEC 27011:2024vsOWASP Top 10:2025

See exactly how ISO/IEC 27011:2024 controls map to OWASP Top 10:2025. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

13
Controls Mapped
31
Gaps Found
20%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO/IEC 27011:2024 maps to OWASP Top 10:2025 with 20% coverage across 10 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 44 ISO/IEC 27011:2024 controls identifies 40 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Technological.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 44 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework(3 mappings)

27011-1Scope
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
27011-3Terms and definitions
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
27400-3Terms and definitions
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control

Clause 5: Organizational Controls for Telecommunications(3 mappings)

27011-5.3Segregation of duties
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
27011-5.4Threat intelligence for telecom
OWASPTOP10-6A06:2025 Vulnerable and Outdated Components
27011-5.6Supplier relationships and telecom supply chain
OWASPTOP10-3A03:2025 Injection Including Cross-Site Scripting

Technological(2 mappings)

27011-8.1User Endpoint Devices2 targets
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
OWASPTOP10-6A06:2025 Vulnerable and Outdated Components

Clause 8: Technological Controls for Telecommunications(5 mappings)

27011-8.1User Endpoint Devices2 targets
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
OWASPTOP10-6A06:2025 Vulnerable and Outdated Components
27011-8.3Cryptography and key management2 targets
OWASPTOP10-2A02:2025 Cryptographic Failures and Secret Management
OWASPTOP10-4A04:2025 Insecure Design and Business Logic (incl. A11 API Abuse)
27011-8.4Logging and monitoring
OWASPTOP10-9A09:2025 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures

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 (332K+)
  • 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/IEC 27011:2024 and OWASP Top 10:2025?

ISO/IEC 27011:2024 has 44 controls across its framework, while OWASP Top 10:2025 covers 10 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 10 overlapping controls (20% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Technological, where 10 ISO/IEC 27011:2024 controls have no direct OWASP Top 10:2025 equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO/IEC 27011:2024 and OWASP Top 10:2025?

Of 44 total ISO/IEC 27011:2024 controls, 10 map directly to OWASP Top 10:2025 controls — representing 20% coverage. The remaining 40 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 27011:2024 to OWASP Top 10:2025?

40 ISO/IEC 27011:2024 controls have no direct equivalent in OWASP Top 10:2025. The highest concentration of gaps is in Technological with 10 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/IEC 27011:2024 and OWASP Top 10:2025?

The domain with the highest gap count is Technological (10 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.