SOC 2 covers 48.4% of ISO 27001:2022
45 of the 93 controls in ISO 27001:2022 are already satisfied by evidence you collected for SOC 2. 48 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 ISO 27001:2022 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.
279 candidate mappings were examined and 198 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.
Policy deployment of control activities is the evidence an assessor wants for security policies.
Identifying and maintaining confidential information is the classification determination an assessor tests.
CC6.7 restricts and protects information during transmission, movement and removal.
Logical access security software, infrastructure and architectures are the access control implementation.
Registration and authorization of new internal and external users is identity lifecycle management.
Issuing system credentials under a registration and authorization process evidences authentication information handling.
Registration, authorization and removal of user access is provisioning and deprovisioning of access rights.
Authorizing, modifying and removing access by role covers review and change of access rights.
Claims that did not hold
195 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.
retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.
Claimed at medium confidence before it was rejected.
Define and enforce usage rules via access and handling controls
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
Define and enforce usage rules via access and handling controls
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
retired metered-API path. 56 percent of its output was refuted wherever it was re-judged, so its residue is not trusted evidence. Superseded by judgement on the Claude Max plan 2026-08-19.
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
No direct asset recovery on exit
Claimed at high confidence before it was rejected.
No direct asset recovery on exit
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
Only confidentiality handling directly supports classification
Claimed at low confidence before it was rejected.
Only confidentiality handling directly supports classification
Claimed at low 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