C5 (Germany) covers 58.4% of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1
115 of the 197 controls in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for C5 (Germany). 82 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.
This number is directional. It says how much of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 your C5 (Germany) 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.
212 candidate mappings were examined and 6 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.
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.
C5 requires documented, communicated audit planning and conduct rules binding the staff who run audits.
C5 audits test whether the system meets the identified legal, regulatory and contractual requirements, with findings tracked.
C5 requires issued secure development policies spanning requirements, design, implementation, testing, deployment and operation.
C5 tests every change to a depth matching its risk rating, rating and remediating defects against defined severity criteria.
C5 requires vulnerabilities found in the service to be severity rated and remediated or mitigated immediately.
C5 requires one documented continuity and contingency planning framework with named owners, activation and improvement.
C5 requires scenario based impact analysis covering dependencies, outage effects, maximum tolerable outage and recovery targets.
C5 derives recovery and interim procedures from the impact analysis inside one documented planning framework.
Claims that did not hold
6 proposed mappings for this pair were rejected. They are kept in the graph rather than deleted, so what was thrown out is as inspectable as what survived. A crosswalk that never rejects anything is not being judged.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-IDM-07 requires the customer be told of provider access within 72 hours, it does not restrict access or protect the data
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-PI-02 fixes contractual exit terms for data return, it says nothing about the cryptographic protocols used to import and export data
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-OPS-16 requires access to the logging systems be restricted and their configuration changed under change management, not that events be monitored and alerted
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-OPS-13 requires automated analysis and correlation of logging data, it does not decide or document which events are logged, which is OPS-10
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-IDM-07 requires notifying the customer of provider access to unencrypted data, it has nothing to do with logging physical access through an access control system
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
judged against C5 criterion titles before the framework carried requirement text; does not hold against the real criterion; C5-SIM-02 triages security incidents, the target concerns failures and anomalies of the monitoring system itself, which is OPS-17
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
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