Framework overlap

Does APRA CPS 234 cover CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG)?

You hold APRA CPS 234 and have been told to do CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG). Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

58% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) you already have

APRA CPS 234 already covers about 58% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG), leaving 10 of 24 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 14 New work 10

No control in APRA CPS 234 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 APRA CPS 234 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

CNCF-COMP-AUDITS
Regulatory Audits
CNCF-COMP-INDUSTRY
Industry-Specific Compliance
CNCF-DEP-OBSERVABILITY
Observability and Metrics
CNCF-DEP-PREFLIGHT
Pre-Flight Deployment Checks
CNCF-DIST-IMGHARDEN
Image Hardening
CNCF-DIST-PIPELINE
Build Pipeline Security
CNCF-RT-AVAILABILITY
Runtime Availability
CNCF-RT-COMPUTE
Runtime Compute Security (Orchestration, Hosts, Containers)
CNCF-SA-PRINCIPLES
Security Principles
CNCF-SA-STACK
Security Stack and Tooling
Show the 14 you already have
CNCF-4C-CLOUD
Cloud Layer Security
CNCF-4C-CLUSTER
Cluster Layer Security
CNCF-4C-CODE
Code Layer Security
CNCF-4C-CONTAINER
Container Layer Security
CNCF-DEP-ARTIFACTS
Artifact and Image Verification
CNCF-DEP-INCIDENT
Incident Response and Mitigation
CNCF-DEV-CHECKS
Security Checks in Development
CNCF-DEV-TESTING
Security Testing
CNCF-DIST-IMGSCAN
Image Scanning
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTHARDEN
Container Application Manifest Hardening
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTSCAN
Container Application Manifest Scanning
CNCF-RT-ACCESS
Runtime Access (Identity, Authentication, Authorization)
CNCF-RT-STORAGE
Runtime Storage Security
CNCF-SA-THREATMODEL
Threat Modeling

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in APRA CPS 234 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