APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk ManagementSOC 2

APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management covers 31.1% of SOC 2

19 of the 61 controls in SOC 2 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management. 42 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.

31.1%
of the target already covered
19
controls evidenced
42
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

What this leaves you to do

SOC 2 has 61 controls. Holding APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management already evidences 19 of them, so the work in front of you is 42 controls, not 61, which is 69% of the standard rather than all of it.

That is the whole claim. We do not know your hourly rate, how long a control takes you, or how many people you have, so there is no figure here in dollars or weeks. Every number in that sentence comes from the two counts above it and can be re-derived from the free tools without taking our word for any of it.

This number is directional. It says how much of SOC 2 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.

39 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.

A - Availability2 of 3 evidenced, 1 to do
CC - Common Criteria (Security)17 of 33 evidenced, 16 to do
C - Confidentiality0 of 2 evidenced, 2 to do
P - Privacy0 of 18 evidenced, 18 to do
PI - Processing Integrity0 of 5 evidenced, 5 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 25SOC2-A1.1argued against and upheld
Maintains capacity to meet availability commitments

Technology capability must meet current and projected business requirements.

CPS 230 para 43SOC2-A1.3argued against and upheld
Recovery plan procedures support system recovery from failures

A systematic testing programme with an annual continuity exercise is required.

CPS 230 para 22SOC2-CC1.2argued against and upheld
COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility

The Board oversees effectiveness of key internal controls with regular updates.

CPS 230 para 20SOC2-CC1.2argued against and upheld
COSO principle 2: Board exercises oversight responsibility

The Board is ultimately accountable for oversight of operational risk management.

CPS 230 para 21SOC2-CC1.3argued against and upheld
COSO principle 3: Management establishes structures, reporting lines, and authorities

The Board must ensure clear roles and responsibilities are set for senior managers.

CPS 230 para 24SOC2-CC1.3argued against and upheld
COSO principle 3: Management establishes structures, reporting lines, and authorities

Senior management is responsible for operational risk across all end to end business processes.

CPS 230 para 31SOC2-CC1.5argued against and upheld
COSO principle 5: Holds individuals accountable for internal control responsibilities

Remediation of weaknesses is supported by clear accountabilities and assurance.

CPS 230 para 21SOC2-CC1.5argued against and upheld
COSO principle 5: Holds individuals accountable for internal control responsibilities

Senior manager responsibilities for operational risk are explicitly assigned.

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