NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 covers 82.5% of AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar

52 of the 63 controls in AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5. 11 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.

82.5%
of the target already covered
52
controls evidenced
11
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar your NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 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.

110 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.

Infrastructure Protection8 of 9 evidenced, 1 to do
Incident Response7 of 8 evidenced, 1 to do
Application Security7 of 8 evidenced, 1 to do
Identity & Access Management13 of 15 evidenced, 2 to do
Data Protection9 of 11 evidenced, 2 to do
Detection3 of 4 evidenced, 1 to do
Security Foundations5 of 8 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.

NIST800-IR-8SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP01argued against and upheld
Identify key personnel and external resources

The incident response plan defines the resources, roles and contacts the capability depends on.

NIST800-IR-8SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP02argued against and upheld
Develop incident management plans

The plan sets the roadmap and structure covering detection through lessons learned.

NIST800-IR-4SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP02argued against and upheld
Develop incident management plans

Incident handling spans preparation, detection, containment, eradication and recovery.

NIST800-AU-7SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP03argued against and upheld
Prepare forensic capabilities

Audit record reduction and on demand reporting exists specifically to support later investigation.

NIST800-IR-3SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP04argued against and upheld
Develop and test security incident response playbooks

Testing the incident response capability using defined test types proves the playbooks work.

NIST800-IR-8SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP04argued against and upheld
Develop and test security incident response playbooks

The incident response plan defines how incidents are handled and is reviewed and updated.

NIST800-IR-4SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP06argued against and upheld
Pre-deploy tools

An incident handling capability requires preparation before an incident, including tooling.

NIST800-IR-3SEC 10: How do you anticipate, respond to, and recover from incidents? | SEC10-BP07argued against and upheld
Run simulations

Testing at a defined frequency using defined test types is the simulation requirement.

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