Cross-Framework Mapping

SOC 2vsISO 27002:2022

See exactly how SOC 2 controls map to ISO 27002:2022. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.

374
Controls Mapped
0
Gaps Found
97%
Coverage

A reviewed coverage crosswalk for this pair is available. See which ISO 27002:2022 controls you already evidence.

According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:

SOC 2 maps to ISO 27002:2022 with 97% coverage across 59 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 61 SOC 2 controls identifies 2 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in P - Privacy.

Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 61 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 309K+ cross-framework mappings

Control Mappings

Showing 20 of 374 mapped controls across 5 domains. Sign up to explore all 309K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.

A - Availability(16 mappings)

SOC2-A1.1Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments3 targets
iso-27002-2022::5.30ICT readiness for business continuity
iso-27002-2022::8.14Redundancy of information processing facilities
iso-27002-2022::8.6Capacity management
SOC2-A1.2Environmental protections, data backups, and recovery infrastructure support availability9 targets
iso-27002-2022::5.29Information security during disruption
iso-27002-2022::5.30ICT readiness for business continuity
iso-27002-2022::5.33Protection of records
iso-27002-2022::7.11Supporting utilities
iso-27002-2022::7.13Equipment maintenance
iso-27002-2022::7.5Protecting against physical and environmental threats
iso-27002-2022::7.8Equipment siting and protection
iso-27002-2022::8.13Information backup
iso-27002-2022::8.14Redundancy of information processing facilities
SOC2-A1.3Recovery plan procedures support system recovery from failures4 targets
iso-27002-2022::5.29Information security during disruption
iso-27002-2022::5.30ICT readiness for business continuity
iso-27002-2022::8.13Information backup
iso-27002-2022::8.34Protection of information systems during audit testing

C - Confidentiality(4 mappings)

SOC2-C1.1Confidential information is identified and protected during receipt, processing, storage4 targets
iso-27002-2022::5.10Acceptable use of information and other associated assets
iso-27002-2022::5.12Classification of information
iso-27002-2022::5.13Labelling of information
iso-27002-2022::5.14Information transfer

+354 more mappings

Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 686 frameworks.

Create Free Account →

Free forever, no credit card required

Coverage crosswalk

The SOC 2 to ISO 27002:2022 crosswalk

The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which ISO 27002:2022 controls your existing SOC 2 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.

SOC 2 into ISO 27002:2022
48.4%

45 of 93 ISO 27002:2022 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for SOC 2. 48 are genuine gaps.

59.5%Organizational controls
50%Technological controls
35.7%Physical controls
12.5%People controls
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 312 candidate mappings were examined and 229 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: 5.1 Policies for information security

Policy deployment of control activities is the evidence an assessor wants for security policies.

Grounded in SOC2-CC5.3 COSO principle 12: Deploys control activities through policies and procedures. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: 5.10 Acceptable use of information and other associated assets

Requires rules for acceptable use, and procedures for handling information and its associated assets, to be identified, documented and put into effect.

Every one of the 45 evidenced controls and 48 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

ISO 27002:2022 into SOC 2
45.9%

28 of 61 SOC 2 controls are evidenced by work you have already done for ISO 27002:2022. 33 are genuine gaps.

66.7%CC - Common Criteria (Security)
100%A - Availability
100%C - Confidentiality
5.6%P - Privacy
Machine verified. Claude Code on the Max plan, judged in context, signed off 2026-08-19. 157 candidate mappings were examined and 80 were removed by a pass whose job was to argue against them.Mappings were judged by Claude Code rather than read line by line by a practitioner. Every claim shows its reasoning so you can check it. Ask and a practitioner will review this pair.

A sample of what the report says

Evidenced: SOC2-A1.1 Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments

Capacity management monitors and plans resource use against demand.

Grounded in iso-27002-2022::8.6 Capacity management. Confidence high, survived the refutation pass.

Gap: SOC2-CC1.1 COSO principle 1: Demonstrates commitment to integrity and ethical values

Demonstrates a commitment to integrity and ethical values

Every one of the 28 evidenced controls and 33 gaps in the report carries this much reasoning, so you can check the claim rather than take it on trust.

SOC 2 to ISO 27002:2022
$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 97% in the header counts how many SOC 2 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many ISO 27002:2022 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 (309K+)
  • 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 SOC 2 and ISO 27002:2022?

SOC 2 has 61 controls across its framework, while ISO 27002:2022 covers 104 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 59 overlapping controls (97% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in P - Privacy, where 1 SOC 2 controls have no direct ISO 27002:2022 equivalent.

How many controls map between SOC 2 and ISO 27002:2022?

Of 61 total SOC 2 controls, 59 map directly to ISO 27002:2022 controls, representing 97% coverage. The remaining 2 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.

What are the compliance gaps when mapping SOC 2 to ISO 27002:2022?

2 SOC 2 controls have no direct equivalent in ISO 27002:2022. The highest concentration of gaps is in P - Privacy 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 SOC 2 and ISO 27002:2022?

The domain with the highest gap count is P - Privacy (1 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.