Framework overlap

Does ISO/IEC 27010:2015 cover PAS 1192-5:2015?

You hold ISO/IEC 27010:2015 and have been told to do PAS 1192-5:2015. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

67% of PAS 1192-5:2015 you already have

ISO/IEC 27010:2015 already covers about 67% of PAS 1192-5:2015, leaving 2 of 6 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 4 Likely covered 0 New work 2

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in ISO/IEC 27010:2015 reaches these. This is the list to scope.

PASONE-2
Built Asset Security Manager, Strategy, Management Plan, Information Requirements
PASONE-5
Supply Chain Security, External Information Sharing, Physical Site Security
Show the 4 you already have
PASONE-1
Security Triage Process, Asset Sensitivity Classification, and Threat Assessment
PASONE-3
Personnel Security, Vetting, Awareness, and Training
PASONE-4
Technical Security: CDE Configuration, BIM Tools, Encryption, Aggregation, Mobile Working
PASONE-6
Incident Management, Audit, Handover, Operational Phase, Decommissioning

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in ISO/IEC 27010:2015 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 ยท Today's edition