NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 covers 50% of DORA
13 of the 26 controls in DORA are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0. 13 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 DORA your NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 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.
76 candidate mappings were examined and 0 were removed. Signed off 2026-08-20, 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.
Analysing potentially adverse events to understand associated activity is the detection process.
Computing hardware and software monitored for adverse events adds a further detection layer.
Declaring incidents when adverse events meet defined criteria is the alert threshold duty.
Networks and network services monitored to find adverse events covers network performance detection.
Incident response and other plans established and maintained is the documented plan duty.
Containing incidents is the quickly contain damage duty.
Executing the recovery portion of the incident response plan is the recovery plan duty.
Restoring critical functions and services to operational capability is the continuity of critical functions duty.
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