ISO 27701:2019 covers 6.1% of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1
12 of the 197 controls in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for ISO 27701:2019. 185 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.
What this leaves you to do
Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 has 197 controls. Holding ISO 27701:2019 already evidences 12 of them, so the work in front of you is 185 controls, not 197, which is 94% of the standard rather than all of it.
That is the whole claim. Every number in that sentence comes from the two counts above it and can be re-derived from the free tools without taking our word for any of it.
In money, using only our numbers. The full report is $299 and names 12 controls of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 you do not have to implement again, which is $24.92 per control identified. That arithmetic uses our price and our count and assumes nothing about you.
In your hours, using your assumption. We do not know what a control costs you to implement, so pick the column that looks like your organisation. These are your figures, not our claim.
| If a control takes you | 4 hours | 8 hours | 16 hours |
|---|---|---|---|
| the 12 already evidenced are | 48 hours | 96 hours | 192 hours |
| and the 185 remaining are | 740 hours | 1,480 hours | 2,960 hours |
Multiply by your own rate. We publish no rate because we have not measured yours, and a number built on an invented rate is the kind of claim this platform exists to argue against.
This number is directional. It says how much of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 your ISO 27701:2019 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.
39 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.
Disposal technique chosen against media characteristics and whether deleted information can be recovered.
Maintained inventory covering categories of personal data, purposes, recipients and a named owner.
Optional collection disabled by default and enabled only by the individual's explicit choice.
Disclosure, storage period and access limited by default to what purposes require.
Privacy impact assessment performed where law or planned processing changes require it.
Same transmission protection carried on the processor side with contractual transmission requirements.
Transmission controls restrict access to transmission systems and log delivery to correct recipients.
Provides a copy of the data held in a structured commonly used format.
Claims that did not hold
3 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.
front matter or family header, typed 2026-08-21: the target states no requirement a party can implement or evidence, so nothing can be evidenced by it
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
front matter or family header, typed 2026-08-21: the target states no requirement a party can implement or evidence, so nothing can be evidenced by it
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
front matter or family header, typed 2026-08-21: the target states no requirement a party can implement or evidence, so nothing can be evidenced by it
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