CIS Controls v8ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents

CIS Controls v8 covers 67.6% of ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents

25 of the 37 controls in ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents are already satisfied by evidence you collected for CIS Controls v8. 12 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.

67.6%
of the target already covered
25
controls evidenced
12
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents your CIS Controls v8 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.

89 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.

Detecting Cyber Security Incidents and Responding5 of 6 evidenced, 1 to do
Preventing Malware Delivery and Execution13 of 17 evidenced, 4 to do
Limiting the Extent of Cyber Security Incidents6 of 10 evidenced, 4 to do
Recovering Data and System Availability1 of 3 evidenced, 2 to do
Preventing Malicious Insiders0 of 1 evidenced, 1 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.

CIS-2.6ASD37-01argued against and upheld
Application control (Essential)

Library allowlisting covers the DLL limb of application control explicitly.

CIS-2.7ASD37-01argued against and upheld
Application control (Essential)

Script allowlisting by signature and version control covers the script limb.

CIS-2.5ASD37-01argued against and upheld
Application control (Essential)

Application allowlisting so only authorised software executes is the same control.

CIS-9.4ASD37-04argued against and upheld
User application hardening (Essential)

Restricting browser and email client plugins and extensions is user application hardening.

CIS-9.6ASD37-06argued against and upheld
Email content filtering (Excellent)

Blocking unnecessary file types at the gateway is the approved attachment type rule.

CIS-9.7ASD37-06argued against and upheld
Email content filtering (Excellent)

Email server anti malware with attachment scanning is the malware inspection required.

CIS-13.10ASD37-07argued against and upheld
Web content filtering (Excellent)

Application layer filtering by proxy inspects and controls web traffic in both directions.

CIS-9.3ASD37-07argued against and upheld
Web content filtering (Excellent)

Enforced network based URL filtering is web content filtering by approved destination.

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