Does CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) cover NIST SP 800-218?

36% of NIST SP 800-218 you already have

CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) already covers about 36% of NIST SP 800-218, leaving 27 of 42 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 15 New work 27

No control in CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) maps directly to one in NIST SP 800-218. 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 CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) reaches these. This is the list to scope.

SP800-218-PO.1.1

Define Security Requirements for Software Development

SP800-218-PO.1.2

Implement Security Requirements in the Toolchain

SP800-218-PO.2.1

Roles and Responsibilities for Secure Development

SP800-218-PO.2.2

Training and Skills Maintenance

SP800-218-PO.2.3

Obtain Management Commitment to Secure Development

SP800-218-PO.3.1

Supporting Toolchain Selection

SP800-218-PO.3.2

Toolchain Configuration and Integration

SP800-218-PO.3.3

Toolchain Generates Security Artifacts

SP800-218-PO.4.1

Criteria for Software Security

SP800-218-PO.4.2

Gather and Safeguard Security Check Information

SP800-218-PO.5.1

Secure Development Environment Implementation

SP800-218-PS.1.1

Protect All Forms of Code from Unauthorized Modification

SP800-218-PS.2.1

Provide a Mechanism for Verifying Software Release Integrity

SP800-218-PS.3.1

Archive and Protect Released Software

SP800-218-PW.1.1

Design Software to Meet Security Requirements

SP800-218-PW.1.3

Support Standardized Security Features

SP800-218-PW.4.1

Reuse Trusted Software Components

SP800-218-PW.4.2

Maintain Well-Secured In-House Components

SP800-218-PW.4.4

Verify Acquired Components Meet Security Requirements

SP800-218-PW.5.1

Secure Coding Practices

SP800-218-PW.6.1

Configure Compilation and Build Processes Securely

SP800-218-PW.6.2

Configure Build Tool Security Features

SP800-218-RV.1.3

Vulnerability Disclosure Policy

SP800-218-RV.3.1

Analyze Vulnerabilities to Identify Root Causes

SP800-218-RV.3.2

Identify and Fix Similar Vulnerabilities

SP800-218-RV.3.3

Review SDLC to Prevent Recurrence

SP800-218-RV.3.4

Document Lessons Learned

Show the 15 you already have

SP800-218-PO.1.3

Communicate Requirements to Third-Party Providers

SP800-218-PO.5.2

Harden Development Endpoints

SP800-218-PS.3.2

Software Bill of Materials

SP800-218-PW.1.2

Track Security Requirements, Risks, and Decisions

SP800-218-PW.2.1

Qualified Review of Software Design

SP800-218-PW.7.1

Code Review

SP800-218-PW.7.2

Perform Code Review and Analysis

SP800-218-PW.8.1

Executable Testing for Security

SP800-218-PW.8.2

Execute Security Testing

SP800-218-PW.9.1

Configure Software to Have Secure Settings by Default

SP800-218-PW.9.2

Implement and Document Secure Defaults

SP800-218-RV.1.1

Identify and Confirm Vulnerabilities on an Ongoing Basis

SP800-218-RV.1.2

Review and Analyze Code for Vulnerabilities

SP800-218-RV.2.1

Assess, Prioritize, and Remediate Vulnerabilities

SP800-218-RV.2.2

Develop and Implement Remediation Plans

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in CNCF Security Technical Advisory Group (TAG) 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