Cross-Framework Mapping

ISO/IEC 27400:2022vsOWASP Top 10:2025

See exactly how ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls map to OWASP Top 10:2025. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

13
Controls Mapped
14
Gaps Found
22%
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/IEC 27400:2022 maps to OWASP Top 10:2025 with 22% coverage across 9 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 27 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls identifies 23 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 27 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 3 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 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: IoT Risk Sources(1 mappings)

27400-5.1IoT Security and Privacy Governance
OWASPTOP10-6A06:2025 Vulnerable and Outdated Components

Clause 6: IoT Security Controls(9 mappings)

27400-6.1Secure Device Design4 targets
OWASPTOP10-1A01:2025 Broken Access Control
OWASPTOP10-2A02:2025 Cryptographic Failures and Secret Management
OWASPTOP10-6A06:2025 Vulnerable and Outdated Components
OWASPTOP10-7A07:2025 Identification and Authentication Failures
27400-6.2Device Identity and Authentication2 targets
OWASPTOP10-2A02:2025 Cryptographic Failures and Secret Management
OWASPTOP10-4A04:2025 Insecure Design and Business Logic (incl. A11 API Abuse)
27400-6.3Secure Update Mechanism
OWASPTOP10-8A08:2025 Software and Data Integrity Failures
27400-6.4Default Configuration Security
OWASPTOP10-2A02:2025 Cryptographic Failures and Secret Management
27400-6.5Security monitoring and incident response
OWASPTOP10-9A09:2025 Security Logging and Monitoring Failures
Coverage crosswalk

A ISO/IEC 27400:2022 to OWASP Top 10:2025 crosswalk, built to order

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which OWASP Top 10:2025 controls your existing ISO/IEC 27400:2022 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

ISO/IEC 27400:2022 into OWASP Top 10:2025
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.

OWASP Top 10:2025 into ISO/IEC 27400:2022
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/IEC 27400:2022 to OWASP Top 10:2025 (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 22% in the header counts how many ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many OWASP Top 10:2025 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/IEC 27400:2022 and OWASP Top 10:2025?

ISO/IEC 27400:2022 has 27 controls across its framework, while OWASP Top 10:2025 covers 10 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 9 overlapping controls (22% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework, where 4 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls have no direct OWASP Top 10:2025 equivalent.

How many controls map between ISO/IEC 27400:2022 and OWASP Top 10:2025?

Of 27 total ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls, 9 map directly to OWASP Top 10:2025 controls, representing 22% coverage. The remaining 23 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 OWASP Top 10:2025?

23 ISO/IEC 27400:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in OWASP Top 10:2025. The highest concentration of gaps is in Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework 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 OWASP Top 10:2025?

The domain with the highest gap count is Clause 1-4: Introduction and Framework (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.