TheArtOfService
UK Cyber EssentialsC5 (Germany)

UK Cyber Essentials covers 10.7% of C5 (Germany)

13 of the 121 controls in C5 (Germany) are already satisfied by evidence you collected for UK Cyber Essentials. 108 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.

10.7%
of the target already covered
13
controls evidenced
108
genuine gaps
0
claims rejected in review

This number is directional. It says how much of C5 (Germany) your UK Cyber Essentials 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.

45 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.

C5: Identity and Access Management7 of 9 evidenced, 2 to do
C5: Communication Security2 of 8 evidenced, 6 to do
C5: Operations3 of 24 evidenced, 21 to do
C5: Product Safety and Security1 of 12 evidenced, 11 to do
C5: Asset Management0 of 6 evidenced, 6 to do
C5: Business Continuity Management0 of 4 evidenced, 4 to do
C5: Compliance0 of 4 evidenced, 4 to do
C5: Cryptography and Key Management0 of 4 evidenced, 4 to do
C5: Procurement, Development and Modification of Information Systems0 of 10 evidenced, 10 to do
C5: Human Resources0 of 6 evidenced, 6 to do
C5: Dealing with Investigation Requests from Government Agencies0 of 4 evidenced, 4 to do
C5: Organisation of Information Security0 of 7 evidenced, 7 to do
C5: Portability and Interoperability0 of 3 evidenced, 3 to do
C5: Physical Security0 of 7 evidenced, 7 to do
C5: Security Incident Management0 of 5 evidenced, 5 to do
C5: Security Policies and Instructions0 of 3 evidenced, 3 to do
C5: Control and Monitoring of Service Providers and Suppliers0 of 5 evidenced, 5 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.

CE-FW.1C5-COS-03argued against and upheld
Monitoring of connections in the Cloud Service Provider's network

Both require trusted internal networks separated from untrusted networks by a firewall.

CE-FW.4C5-COS-04argued against and upheld
Cross-network access

Both permit cross-network access only on documented approved business justification.

CE-FW.1C5-COS-04argued against and upheld
Cross-network access

Both require every internet boundary controlled by a correctly configured firewall.

CE-AC.1C5-IDM-02argued against and upheld
Granting and change of user accounts and access rights

Both require accounts and entitlements issued only after authorised approval.

CE-AC.3C5-IDM-03argued against and upheld
Locking and withdrawal of user accounts in the event of inactivity or multiple failed logins

Both require accounts disabled when unused, including extended absence.

CE-SC.5C5-IDM-03argued against and upheld
Locking and withdrawal of user accounts in the event of inactivity or multiple failed logins

Both require accounts locked or throttled after repeated failed authentication attempts.

CE-AC.3C5-IDM-04argued against and upheld
Withdraw or adjust access rights as the task area changes

Both require access removed or adjusted on role change within a defined timeframe.

CE-AC.6C5-IDM-05argued against and upheld
Regular review of access rights

Both require assigned access rights reviewed regularly and removed where no longer needed.

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