Framework overlap

Does Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 cover CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG)?

You hold Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 and have been told to do CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG). Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

100% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) you already have

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 already covers about 100% of CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG), leaving 0 of 24 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 24 Likely covered 0 New work 0

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

Nothing. Every control is reached.

Show the 24 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-COMP-AUDITS
Regulatory Audits
CNCF-COMP-INDUSTRY
Industry-Specific Compliance
CNCF-DEP-ARTIFACTS
Artifact and Image Verification
CNCF-DEP-INCIDENT
Incident Response and Mitigation
CNCF-DEP-OBSERVABILITY
Observability and Metrics
CNCF-DEP-PREFLIGHT
Pre-Flight Deployment Checks
CNCF-DEV-CHECKS
Security Checks in Development
CNCF-DEV-TESTING
Security Testing
CNCF-DIST-IMGHARDEN
Image Hardening
CNCF-DIST-IMGSCAN
Image Scanning
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTHARDEN
Container Application Manifest Hardening
CNCF-DIST-MANIFESTSCAN
Container Application Manifest Scanning
CNCF-DIST-PIPELINE
Build Pipeline Security
CNCF-RT-ACCESS
Runtime Access (Identity, Authentication, Authorization)
CNCF-RT-AVAILABILITY
Runtime Availability
CNCF-RT-COMPUTE
Runtime Compute Security (Orchestration, Hosts, Containers)
CNCF-RT-STORAGE
Runtime Storage Security
CNCF-SA-PRINCIPLES
Security Principles
CNCF-SA-STACK
Security Stack and Tooling
CNCF-SA-THREATMODEL
Threat Modeling

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 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