NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 covers 72.7% of C5 (Germany)
88 of the 121 controls in C5 (Germany) are already satisfied by evidence you collected for NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5. 33 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 C5 (Germany) 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.
164 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.
Component inventory with required attributes and lifecycle accuracy is the same requirement.
Media sanitisation before disposal or release, by matched technique, is the decommissioning requirement.
Signed access agreements before access, plus reconfirmation, evidence the commitment C5 wants.
Security categorization sets protection needs across confidentiality, integrity and availability with documented rationale.
Contingency plan identifies essential functions, dependencies and recovery objectives, which is the impact analysis.
A single documented contingency plan derived from essential function analysis is exactly CP-2.
Testing at a defined frequency, reviewing results and updating the plan matches directly.
Independent assessor, approved plan and annual assessment of control effectiveness satisfies internal ISMS audit.
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