C5 (Germany) covers 32.3% of NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5
97 of the 300 controls in NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for C5 (Germany). 203 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 NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 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.
205 candidate mappings were examined and 2 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 a documented role and rights concept and access management policy issued to those it binds.
C5 invalidates a session once detected as inactive using a configurable timeout.
C5 grants cross network access only on the basis of a security assessment, with gateways at every perimeter.
C5 locks accounts unused for two months and revokes them after six, a named account lifecycle step.
C5 operates defined procedures for issuing and amending accounts and entitlements for staff and system components.
C5 places service functions behind authorisation checks confirming the requester may perform the action.
C5 segregates tenant traffic at network level under a documented segregation concept.
C5 separates rights administration from access approval and development from testing and release.
Claims that did not hold
2 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; the C5 criterion title names failed logins but its basic criterion covers only dormancy, locking after two months unused and revoking after six; C5 sets no failed logon threshold or lockout duration
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 log data, not the identification and selection of the event types to be logged, which is OPS-10
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