ISO 27002:2022NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

ISO 27002:2022 covers 61.3% of NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0

65 of the 106 controls in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for ISO 27002:2022. 41 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.

61.3%
of the target already covered
65
controls evidenced
41
genuine gaps
81
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 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.

194 candidate mappings were examined and 89 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.

PR - Protect19 of 22 evidenced, 3 to do
DE - Detect9 of 11 evidenced, 2 to do
RS - Respond8 of 13 evidenced, 5 to do
ID - Identify12 of 21 evidenced, 9 to do
RC - Recover4 of 8 evidenced, 4 to do
GV - Govern13 of 28 evidenced, 15 to do
Govern0 of 3 evidenced, 3 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.

5.25NIST-CSF-DE.AE-02argued against and upheld
Potentially adverse events are analyzed to better understand associated activities

Assessment of security events to decide their nature is the analysis required.

8.16NIST-CSF-DE.AE-03argued against and upheld
Information is correlated from multiple sources

Monitoring requires correlation of information from multiple sources.

6.8NIST-CSF-DE.AE-06argued against and upheld
Information on adverse events is provided to authorized staff

Event reporting requires information on events to reach the responsible staff.

5.7NIST-CSF-DE.AE-07argued against and upheld
Cyber threat intelligence and contextual information are integrated into analysis

Threat intelligence must be analysed and fed into security activities.

5.25NIST-CSF-DE.AE-08argued against and upheld
Incidents are declared when adverse events meet defined criteria

Assessment decides whether an event is classified as an incident against criteria.

8.16NIST-CSF-DE.CM-01argued against and upheld
Networks and network services are monitored to find potentially adverse events

Monitoring requires networks and network services to be watched for anomalies.

7.4NIST-CSF-DE.CM-02argued against and upheld
The physical environment is monitored to find potentially adverse events

Physical security monitoring of premises is the same outcome.

8.16NIST-CSF-DE.CM-03argued against and upheld
Personnel activity and technology usage are monitored to find potentially adverse events

Monitoring covers user activity and system use for anomalous behaviour.

Claims that did not hold

81 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.

5.26NIST-CSF-DE.AE-06
Information on adverse events is provided to authorized staff

Held back 2026-08-19. Generated by the retired metered path, refuted at 56 percent wherever re-judged. Pair pulled from sale pending a rebuild on the Max plan.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.2NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01
Organizational context for cybersecurity risk management is understood

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.31NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01
Organizational context for cybersecurity risk management is understood

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.1NIST-CSF-GV.OC-01
Organizational context for cybersecurity risk management is understood

Held back 2026-08-19. Generated by the retired metered path, refuted at 56 percent wherever re-judged. Pair pulled from sale pending a rebuild on the Max plan.

Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.

5.1NIST-CSF-GV.RM-01
Risk management objectives are established and agreed upon

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.4NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03
Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.35NIST-CSF-GV.RM-03
Cybersecurity risk management activities and outcomes are included in enterprise risk

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.

5.1NIST-CSF-GV.RM-04
Strategic direction for cybersecurity risk management is established

retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.

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