ISO 27001:2022ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents

ISO 27001:2022 covers 78.4% of ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents

29 of the 37 controls in ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents are already satisfied by evidence you collected for ISO 27001:2022. 8 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.

78.4%
of the target already covered
29
controls evidenced
8
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents your ISO 27001:2022 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.

44 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.

Preventing Malicious Insiders1 of 1 evidenced
Detecting Cyber Security Incidents and Responding5 of 6 evidenced, 1 to do
Limiting the Extent of Cyber Security Incidents8 of 10 evidenced, 2 to do
Preventing Malware Delivery and Execution13 of 17 evidenced, 4 to do
Recovering Data and System Availability2 of 3 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.

8.19ASD37-01argued against and upheld
Application control (Essential)

Control over software installed on operational systems is application control.

8.8ASD37-02argued against and upheld
Patch applications (Essential)

Management of technical vulnerabilities is the application patching requirement.

8.9ASD37-04argued against and upheld
User application hardening (Essential)

Configuration management with secure settings is user application hardening.

8.7ASD37-06argued against and upheld
Email content filtering (Excellent)

Protection against malware covers filtering mail attachments and content.

8.23ASD37-07argued against and upheld
Web content filtering (Excellent)

Web filtering of accessed content is the same control.

8.23ASD37-08argued against and upheld
Deny direct internet connectivity (Excellent)

Web filtering through a controlled proxy is how direct connectivity is denied.

8.9ASD37-10argued against and upheld
Server application hardening (Very Good)

Configuration management applied to server applications is server hardening.

8.9ASD37-11argued against and upheld
Operating system hardening (Very Good)

Secure configuration of operating systems is the same hardening requirement.

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