46% of EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07) you already have
EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (EIOPA-BoS-20/600) already covers about 46% of EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07), leaving
15 of 28 controls as genuinely new work.
Already covered 0
Likely covered 13
New work 15
No control in EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (EIOPA-BoS-20/600)
maps directly to one in EBA Guidelines on ICT and Security Risk Management (EBA/GL/2024/07). 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 EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (EIOPA-BoS-20/600) reaches these. This is the list to scope.
EBA-GL-3.1Proportionality
EBA-GL-3.3.3Classification and risk assessment
EBA-GL-3.3.4Risk mitigation
EBA-GL-3.4.1Information security policy
EBA-GL-3.4.4ICT operations security
EBA-GL-3.5ICT operations management
EBA-GL-3.6.1ICT project management
EBA-GL-3.6.2ICT systems acquisition and development
EBA-GL-3.6.3ICT change management
EBA-GL-3.7.2Business continuity planning
EBA-GL-3.7.4Testing of plans
EBA-GL-3.7.5Crisis communications
EBA-GL-3.8Payment service user relationship management
Show the 13 you already have
EBA-GL-3.2.3Use of third party providers
EBA-GL-3.3.1Organisation and objectives
EBA-GL-3.3.2Identification of functions, processes and assets
EBA-GL-3.4.2Logical security
EBA-GL-3.4.3Physical security
EBA-GL-3.4.5Security monitoring
EBA-GL-3.4.6Information security reviews, assessment and testing
EBA-GL-3.4.7Information security training and awareness
EBA-GL-3.5.1ICT incident and problem management
EBA-GL-3.7.1Business impact analysis
EBA-GL-3.7.3Response and recovery plans
How this is calculated
Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in EIOPA Guidelines on ICT Security and Governance (EIOPA-BoS-20/600) 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