PCI DSS 4.0 covers 63.5% of AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar
40 of the 63 controls in AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar are already satisfied by evidence you collected for PCI DSS 4.0. 23 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 AWS Well-Architected Security Pillar your PCI DSS 4.0 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.
75 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.
Named personnel are available around the clock to respond to alerts and suspected incidents.
A documented incident response plan covers detection, containment, eradication, recovery and legal review.
Prescriptive response procedures exist for the specific scenario of card data found where it should not be.
The response plan and its procedures are reviewed and tested at least annually.
Annual testing of the incident response plan is the exercise this practice asks for.
The plan is modified and evolved from lessons learned after each incident.
Development personnel are trained at least annually in secure design and secure coding for their language.
Public-facing applications are tested with vulnerability assessment tools annually and after changes.
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