24% of IEC 62304:2015 Medical Device Software Lifecycle Processes you already have
Belgium CyberFundamentals already covers about 24% of IEC 62304:2015 Medical Device Software Lifecycle Processes, leaving
25 of 33 controls as genuinely new work.
Already covered 0
Likely covered 8
New work 25
No control in Belgium CyberFundamentals
maps directly to one in IEC 62304:2015 Medical Device Software Lifecycle Processes. 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 Belgium CyberFundamentals reaches these. This is the list to scope.
IEC62304-4.2Risk Management
IEC62304-4.3Software Safety Classification
IEC62304-4.4Legacy Software
IEC62304-5.1.1Software Development Plan
IEC62304-5.1.6SOUP Identification
IEC62304-5.4Software Detailed Design
IEC62304-5.5Software Unit Implementation and Verification
IEC62304-5.6Software Integration and Testing
IEC62304-5.7Software System Testing
IEC62304-5.8Software Release
IEC62304-6.1Software Maintenance Plan
IEC62304-6.2Problem and Modification Analysis
IEC62304-6.3Modification Implementation
IEC62304-7.1Risk Analysis of Software Contributing to Hazardous Situations
IEC62304-7.3Verification of Risk Control Measures
IEC62304-8.1Configuration Identification
IEC62304-8.3Configuration Status Accounting
IEC62304-9Software Problem Resolution Process
IEC62304-9.1Prepare Problem Reports
IEC62304-9.2Investigate the Problem
IEC62304-9.3Advise Relevant Parties
IEC62304-9.5Maintain Records
IEC62304-9.6Analyze Problems for Trends
IEC62304-9.7Verify Software Problem Resolution
IEC62304-9.8Test Documentation
Show the 8 you already have
IEC62304-4.1Quality Management System
IEC62304-5.1Software Development Planning
IEC62304-5.2Software Requirements Analysis
IEC62304-5.3Software Architectural Design
IEC62304-7.2Risk Control Measures
IEC62304-7.4Risk Management of Software Changes
IEC62304-8.2Change Control
IEC62304-9.4Use Change Control Process
How this is calculated
Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in Belgium CyberFundamentals 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