OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025vsCISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0
See exactly how OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 controls map to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 maps to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 with 62% coverage across 5 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 8 OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 controls identifies 3 compliance gaps — primarily concentrated in Monitoring and Testing.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 8 controls analysed | 718 frameworks | 332K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 13 of 13 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 332K+ mappings across 718 frameworks.
Prompt Security(4 mappings)
Output Quality and Safety(1 mappings)
Sensitive Information and Privacy(4 mappings)
Supply Chain and Vector Database Security(3 mappings)
Agency and Resource Bounds(1 mappings)
Related Comparisons
Other OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 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.
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 OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?
OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 has 8 controls across its framework, while CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 covers 35 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 5 overlapping controls (62% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Monitoring and Testing, where 1 OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 controls have no direct CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 equivalent.
How many controls map between OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?
Of 8 total OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 controls, 5 map directly to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0 controls — representing 62% coverage. The remaining 3 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 to CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?
3 OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 controls have no direct equivalent in CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0. The highest concentration of gaps is in Monitoring and Testing with 1 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 OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 and CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0?
The domain with the highest gap count is Monitoring and Testing (1 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.