SOC 2 covers 34.5% of CMMC 2.0
38 of the 110 controls in CMMC 2.0 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for SOC 2. 72 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
CMMC 2.0 has 110 controls. Holding SOC 2 already evidences 38 of them, so the work in front of you is 72 controls, not 110, which is 65% 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 CMMC 2.0 your SOC 2 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.
304 candidate mappings were examined and 229 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.
Logical access security software and architectures limit system access to authorized users and processes.
Logical access over protected assets limits which transactions and functions a user may execute.
Measures against threats outside system boundaries are how external connections are verified and controlled.
Transmission, movement and removal of information is restricted to authorized users and processes.
Segregation of duties is explicitly required when access is authorized by role.
Access is granted with consideration of least privilege, which is this practice.
Monitoring system components for anomalies requires the audit records this practice demands.
Anomalies are analyzed to determine whether they indicate malicious acts, which is audit review.
Claims that did not hold
223 proposed mappings for this pair were rejected. They are kept in the graph rather than deleted, so what was thrown out is as inspectable as what survived. A crosswalk that never rejects anything is not being judged.
Held back 2026-08-19. Generated by the retired metered path, refuted at 56 percent wherever re-judged. Pair pulled from sale pending a rebuild on the Max plan.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
Held back 2026-08-19. Generated by the retired metered path, refuted at 56 percent wherever re-judged. Pair pulled from sale pending a rebuild on the Max plan.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
did not survive the adversarial verification pass run by qwen3-235b-a22b-2507 via openrouter. No per-edge rationale was recorded at the time, so the process is stated rather than a reason invented.
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
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