Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 covers 41.9% of APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management
18 of the 43 controls in APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management are already satisfied by evidence you collected for Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1. 25 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 APRA CPS 230 Operational Risk Management your Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 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.
91 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.
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.
Approved and maintained continuity plan implements the resilience strategies.
Strategies to absorb, withstand and recover within appetite are exactly this obligation.
Documented accountability for planning, operating, assessing and improving governance is this requirement.
Planning and monitoring capacity so systems meet business performance requirements is this obligation.
Impact analysis of plausible severe disruptions is the scenario analysis this requires.
Findings tracked with owners and due dates and progress reported meets prompt rectification.
Risk based scope and frequency is precisely testing proportionate to materiality.
Independent recurring assessments against recognised standards test control effectiveness.
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