Internal audit has to assess the security control assurance a related or third party provides where both hold: (a) an incident affecting the assets could have a material financial or non-financial effect on the entity itself or on the interests of its depositors, policyholders, beneficiaries or other customers (the materiality limb); and (b) internal audit plans to rely on that party's assurance. A footnote extends this to all such parties, not only CPS 231 or SPS 231 material outsourcing.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
APRA CPS 234 34 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of APRA CPS 234 your existing evidence covers. Hold NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and 19 of 48 APRA CPS 234 controls already carry evidence.
Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 5 were rejected on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 pair alone.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.