NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 covers 42.6% of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1
84 of the 197 controls in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3. 113 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 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 already evidences 84 of them, so the work in front of you is 113 controls, not 197, which is 57% of the standard rather than all of it.
That is the whole claim. We do not know your hourly rate, how long a control takes you, or how many people you have, so there is no figure here in dollars or weeks. 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.
This number is directional. It says how much of Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 your NIST SP 800-171 Rev 3 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.
169 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.
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.
POAM documents, owns and tracks assessment findings to closure with due dates.
Security engineering principles applied through specification, design, development and modification is the same lifecycle evidence.
Flaw remediation identifies, reports and corrects software flaws within defined time periods.
Changes are tested, validated and documented before deployment.
Change control requires review and explicit approval before changes proceed.
Documented baseline configurations give the approved state changes are tested against.
Security impact analysis before implementation is the risk management evidence for each change.
Change control requires explicit consideration of security impact for each proposed change.
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