APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk ManagementNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management covers 34.9% of NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

37 of the 106 controls in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 69 are genuine gaps. Every claim below was judged against both control sets and then argued against; the ones that did not survive are published further down with the reason each failed.

34.9%
of the target already covered
37
controls evidenced
69
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 your APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management evidence satisfies. The reverse pair is a different number, often very different, because a security standard has enormous depth for access control and almost none for lawful basis or data subject rights.

60 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed. Signed off 2026-08-19, review level machine verified. 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.

Where the gaps are

Coverage is never evenly spread. A source standard usually satisfies one part of a target almost completely and barely touches another, and which part is which is the thing worth knowing before you plan the work.

GV - Govern19 of 28 evidenced, 9 to do
Govern2 of 3 evidenced, 1 to do
ID - Identify10 of 21 evidenced, 11 to do
RC - Recover2 of 8 evidenced, 6 to do
RS - Respond2 of 13 evidenced, 11 to do
PR - Protect2 of 22 evidenced, 20 to do
DE - Detect0 of 11 evidenced, 11 to do

Theme level, not control level, deliberately. The per-control list of what is evidenced and what is a gap is the report itself, so publishing it here would be publishing the thing being sold.

Claims that held

A sample. Each one names the control whose evidence does the work, the control it satisfies, and why.

CPS 230 para 24NIST-CSF-GV.OC-03argued against and upheld
Legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements are understood

Legal, regulatory and compliance risk must be identified and managed.

CPS 230 para 36NIST-CSF-GV.OC-04argued against and upheld
Critical objectives, capabilities, and services are understood

Minimum classes of critical operation are prescribed unless the entity justifies otherwise.

CPS 230 para 34NIST-CSF-GV.OC-04argued against and upheld
Critical objectives, capabilities, and services are understood

Critical operations must be defined, identified and held in a register.

CPS 230 para 49NIST-CSF-GV.OC-05argued against and upheld
Outcomes and dependencies of critical services are understood

Providers relied on to undertake a critical operation must be identified and registered.

CPS 230 para 27NIST-CSF-GV.OC-05argued against and upheld
Outcomes and dependencies of critical services are understood

The processes and resources needed to deliver critical operations must be documented.

CPS 230 para 17NIST-CSF-GV.OV-01argued against and upheld
Risk management strategy outcomes are reviewed

Operational risk management must be reviewed under the framework reviews.

CPS 230 para 30NIST-CSF-GV.OV-03argued against and upheld
Risk management performance is evaluated

Control effectiveness is monitored, reviewed, tested and reported to senior management.

CPS 230 para 16NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01argued against and upheld
Risk management objectives are established and agreed upon

Operational risk governance with a defined appetite and objectives is required.

Claims that did not hold

Nothing proposed for this pair was rejected in review. That is unusual and worth knowing rather than hiding: it means the candidate set was small and every candidate held.

The full report

Everything above is a sample. The report is every evidenced control and every gap, with the reasoning and the source document behind each one, in a form you can hand to an assessor. $299, emailed immediately.

Buy this crosswalk