29% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) you already have
ACSC Essential Eight already covers about 29% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG), leaving
17 of 24 controls as genuinely new work.
Already covered 0
Likely covered 7
New work 17
No control in ACSC Essential Eight
maps directly to one in CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG). Everything counted as covered is covered because both
map to the same third standard, which is what a crosswalk is, but it is an inference rather
than a lookup.
What is genuinely new work
Nothing in ACSC Essential Eight reaches these. This is the list to scope.
CNCF-4C-CLUSTERCluster Layer Security
CNCF-4C-CODECode Layer Security
CNCF-COMP-AUDITSRegulatory Audits
CNCF-COMP-INDUSTRYIndustry-Specific Compliance
CNCF-DEP-ARTIFACTSArtifact and Image Verification
CNCF-DEP-INCIDENTIncident Response and Mitigation
CNCF-DEP-OBSERVABILITYObservability and Metrics
CNCF-DEP-PREFLIGHTPre-Flight Deployment Checks
CNCF-DEV-CHECKSSecurity Checks in Development
CNCF-DIST-PIPELINEBuild Pipeline Security
CNCF-RT-ACCESSRuntime Access (Identity, Authentication, Authorization)
CNCF-RT-AVAILABILITYRuntime Availability
CNCF-RT-COMPUTERuntime Compute Security (Orchestration, Hosts, Containers)
CNCF-RT-STORAGERuntime Storage Security
CNCF-SA-PRINCIPLESSecurity Principles
CNCF-SA-STACKSecurity Stack and Tooling
CNCF-SA-THREATMODELThreat Modeling
Show the 7 you already have
CNCF-4C-CLOUDCloud Layer Security
CNCF-4C-CONTAINERContainer Layer Security
CNCF-DEV-TESTINGSecurity Testing
CNCF-DIST-IMGHARDENImage Hardening
CNCF-DIST-IMGSCANImage Scanning
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTHARDENContainer Application Manifest Hardening
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTSCANContainer Application Manifest Scanning
How this is calculated
Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ACSC Essential Eight to that control. Likely
covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third
standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one
friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified
fact.
Coverage is not symmetric.
Run it the other way and you will get a
different number; both are correct.
From 332,959 cross-framework control
mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against
their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means
the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.
Try another pair ยท
Today's edition