Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO/IEC 27031:2011vsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0

See exactly how ISO/IEC 27031:2011 controls map to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

8
Controls Mapped
19
Gaps Found
15%
Coverage

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

ISO/IEC 27031:2011 maps to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 with 15% coverage across 8 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 27 ISO/IEC 27031:2011 controls identifies 31 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Implement.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 27 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 8 of 8 mapped controls across 6 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.

Foundation(1 mappings)

27031-5.1IRBC Policy
CPG-6.BSupply Chain Incident Reporting

Clause 4-5: Overview and IRBC Concepts(1 mappings)

27031-5.1IRBC Policy
CPG-6.BSupply Chain Incident Reporting

Operate(2 mappings)

27031-8.1Exercising and Testing
CPG-7.CSystem Backups
27031-8.2Maintaining IRBC
CPG-7.CSystem Backups

Clause 8: IRBC Implementation(2 mappings)

27031-8.1Exercising and Testing
CPG-7.CSystem Backups
27031-8.2Maintaining IRBC
CPG-7.CSystem Backups

Monitor(1 mappings)

27031-9.3Management Review
CPG-7.CSystem Backups

Clause 9: Monitor and Review(1 mappings)

27031-9.3Management Review
CPG-7.CSystem Backups

Related Comparisons

Other ISO/IEC 27031:2011 comparisons

Other CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 comparisons

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 27031:2011 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

ISO/IEC 27031:2011 has 27 controls across its framework, while CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 covers 35 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 8 overlapping controls (15% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Implement, where 4 ISO/IEC 27031:2011 controls have no direct CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO/IEC 27031:2011 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

Of 27 total ISO/IEC 27031:2011 controls, 8 map directly to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls — representing 15% coverage. The remaining 31 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 27031:2011 to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

31 ISO/IEC 27031:2011 controls have no direct equivalent in CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Implement with 4 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 27031:2011 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?

The domain with the highest gap count is Implement (4 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.