ISO/IEC 27400:2022vsHKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)
See exactly how ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls map to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO/IEC 27400:2022 maps to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) with 25% coverage across 12 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 32 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls identifies 30 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Clause 8: IoT Lifecycle Security.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 32 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 15 of 15 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework(3 mappings)
Governance(2 mappings)
Clause 5: IoT Risk Sources(2 mappings)
Device(3 mappings)
Clause 6: IoT Security Controls(5 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other ISO/IEC 27400:2022 comparisons
Other HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 718 frameworks — at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 718 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (332K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between ISO/IEC 27400:2022 and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?
ISO/IEC 27400:2022 has 32 controls across its framework, while HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) covers 11 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 12 overlapping controls (25% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 8: IoT Lifecycle Security, where 4 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls have no direct HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO/IEC 27400:2022 and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?
Of 32 total ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls, 12 map directly to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF) controls — representing 25% coverage. The remaining 30 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO/IEC 27400:2022 to HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?
30 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF). The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 8: IoT Lifecycle Security 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 27400:2022 and HKMA Cyber Resilience Assessment Framework (C-RAF)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 8: IoT Lifecycle Security (4 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
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.