TheArtOfService
ISO 27002:2022Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1

ISO 27002:2022 covers 56.3% of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1

111 of the 197 controls in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for ISO 27002:2022. 86 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.

56.3%
of the target already covered
111
controls evidenced
86
genuine gaps
2
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 your ISO 27002:2022 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.

230 candidate mappings were examined and 12 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. This pair was additionally re-checked after CSA CCM v4.0.1 was rebuilt from the CAIQ v4.0.1 source on 2026-08-19: its mappings were originally judged when CCM carried no requirement text, a sample of 70 across the 21 CCM pairs found about 80 percent holding cleanly, and the two identified errors were corrected before release.

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.

IAM - Identity & Access Management14 of 16 evidenced, 2 to do
SEF - Security Incident Management, E-Discovery & Cloud Forensics7 of 8 evidenced, 1 to do
DCS - Datacenter Security13 of 15 evidenced, 2 to do
CCC - Change Control & Configuration Management7 of 9 evidenced, 2 to do
HRS - Human Resources Security10 of 13 evidenced, 3 to do
AIS - Application & Interface Security5 of 7 evidenced, 2 to do
BCR - Business Continuity Management & Operational Resilience7 of 11 evidenced, 4 to do
GRC - Governance, Risk & Compliance5 of 8 evidenced, 3 to do
IVS - Infrastructure & Virtualization Security5 of 9 evidenced, 4 to do
STA - Supply Chain Management, Transparency & Accountability7 of 14 evidenced, 7 to do
A&A - Audit & Assurance3 of 6 evidenced, 3 to do
DSP - Data Security & Privacy Lifecycle Management9 of 19 evidenced, 10 to do
LOG - Logging & Monitoring6 of 13 evidenced, 7 to do
UEM - Universal Endpoint Management6 of 14 evidenced, 8 to do
TVM - Threat & Vulnerability Management4 of 10 evidenced, 6 to do
CEK - Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management3 of 21 evidenced, 18 to do
IPY - Interoperability & Portability0 of 4 evidenced, 4 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.

5.35CCM-A&A-01argued against and upheld
Audit and Assurance Policy and Procedures

Independent review of information security establishes the audit and assurance regime and its cycle.

5.35CCM-A&A-02argued against and upheld
Independent Assessments

Requires reviews by parties independent of the area assessed, at planned intervals.

5.31CCM-A&A-04argued against and upheld
Requirements Compliance

Identification of legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements is the compliance baseline.

5.36CCM-A&A-04argued against and upheld
Requirements Compliance

Requires regular verification that systems comply with applicable policies and standards.

8.25CCM-AIS-01argued against and upheld
Application and Interface Security Policy and Procedures

Secure development rules must be established, documented and applied to in-house development.

8.26CCM-AIS-01argued against and upheld
Application and Interface Security Policy and Procedures

Application security requirements must be identified, specified and approved before development.

8.26CCM-AIS-02argued against and upheld
Application Security Baseline Requirements

Requires documented, approved security requirements acting as the application security baseline.

8.25CCM-AIS-04argued against and upheld
Secure Application Design and Development

Secure development life cycle governs design, development and deployment of applications.

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.

8.32CCM-CCC-06
Change Management Baseline

Superseded by the Claude Code judgement pass for this pair on 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.22CCM-STA-10
Supply Chain Agreement Review

re-pointed 2026-08-19: judged when CCM carried no requirement text, so it landed on the control whose title resembled the requirement rather than the control that carries it

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