HIPAA Security Rule covers 33.9% of C5 (Germany)
41 of the 121 controls in C5 (Germany) are already satisfied by evidence you collected for HIPAA Security Rule. 80 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 C5 (Germany) your HIPAA Security Rule 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.
103 candidate mappings were examined and 3 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.
Policies governing receipt and removal of hardware and media into, out of and within the facility are the safe handling instructions required
Policies specifying the proper functions and manner of performance for workstations are the acceptable use instructions required
Removal of data from media before they are released for reuse is required directly
Policies for the final disposition of the data and the hardware holding it are the erasure limb of decommissioning
Assessing the relative criticality of applications and data to drive the other contingency components is the impact analysis required
Procedures to continue critical processes during emergency mode are the interim procedures the plan must carry
Procedures to restore lost data and resume operations are the recovery procedures the plan must carry
Established policies for responding to emergencies that damage the systems are the documented continuity plan required
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. this criterion is about which security obligations continue to bind a person after their engagement ends and for how long; terminating access to data when employment ends is access withdrawal, now mapped to C5-IDM-04
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. the title mentions failed logins but the basic criterion covers only dormancy: automatic locking after two months unused, approval to reinstate and revocation after six months; terminating access when employment ends satisfies none of it and belongs to C5-IDM-04
Claimed at medium 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