Does Armenia Law on Protection of Personal Data (2015) cover Azure Security Benchmark?

41% of Azure Security Benchmark you already have

Armenia Law on Protection of Personal Data (2015) already covers about 41% of Azure Security Benchmark, leaving 32 of 54 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 2 Likely covered 20 New work 32

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in Armenia Law on Protection of Personal Data (2015) reaches these. This is the list to scope.

AM-2

Use Only Approved Services

AM-3

Ensure Security of Asset Lifecycle Management

ASB-09

Federation and single sign-on

ASB-10

API security and access tokens

ASB-15

Secure data deletion in cloud

ASB-18

Cloud workload protection

ASB-25

Service level agreement management

BR-1

Ensure Regular Automated Backups

BR-2

Protect Backup and Recovery Data

DP-2

Monitor Anomalies and Threats Targeting Sensitive Data

DP-3

Encrypt Sensitive Data in Transit

DP-4

Encrypt Data at Rest by Default

DS-6

Enforce Security of Workload Throughout DevOps Lifecycle

ES-1

Use Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)

ES-2

Use Modern Anti-Malware Software

GS-1

Align Organisation Roles, Responsibilities and Accountabilities

IM-3

Manage Application Identities Securely

IM-4

Authenticate Server and Services

IM-6

Use Strong Authentication Controls

IM-7

Restrict Resource Access Based on Conditions

LT-3

Enable Logging for Investigation

LT-4

Enable Network Logging for Investigation

LT-5

Centralise Security Log Management and Analysis

NS-1

Establish Network Segmentation Boundaries

NS-2

Secure Cloud Services with Network Controls

NS-3

Deploy Firewall at Edge of Enterprise Network

NS-5

Deploy DDoS Protection

PA-1

Separate and Limit Highly Privileged Users

PA-2

Avoid Standing Access for User Accounts and Permissions

PA-3

Manage Lifecycle of Identities and Entitlements

PV-2

Audit and Enforce Secure Configurations

PV-5

Perform Vulnerability Assessments

Show the 22 you already have

ASB-07

Multi-factor authentication for cloud

DS-2

Ensure Inventory of Software Components in Code

ASB-01

Shared responsibility model definition

ASB-02

Cloud security policy and strategy

ASB-03

Cloud risk assessment

ASB-04

Regulatory compliance for cloud services

ASB-05

Cloud security roles and responsibilities

ASB-06

Cloud identity management

ASB-08

Privileged access in cloud environments

ASB-11

Data classification for cloud

ASB-12

Encryption of cloud-stored data

ASB-13

Data residency and sovereignty

ASB-14

Data backup and recovery in cloud

ASB-16

Virtual network segmentation

ASB-17

Container and serverless security

ASB-19

Image and template hardening

ASB-20

Cloud configuration management

ASB-21

Cloud security monitoring and logging

ASB-22

Incident response in cloud

ASB-23

Cloud vulnerability management

ASB-24

Cloud change management

IM-1

Use Centralised Identity and Authentication System

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in Armenia Law on Protection of Personal Data (2015) 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 · Today's edition