18% of ISO/IEC 27006:2024 you already have
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 already covers about 18% of ISO/IEC 27006:2024, leaving
41 of 50 controls as genuinely new work.
Already covered 6
Likely covered 3
New work 41
What is genuinely new work
Nothing in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 reaches these. This is the list to scope.
27006-5.1General Requirements for Certification Bodies
27006-5.2Management of Impartiality
27006-5.3Liability and Financing
27006-6.1Competence of personnel
27006-6.1.1Competence of Personnel
27006-6.1.2Personnel Involved in Certification
27006-6.1.3Use of Individual External Auditors and Technical Experts
27006-6.2Personnel Records
27006-7.1General competence requirements
27006-7.1.1Determining Audit Time
27006-7.1.2Multi-Site Sampling
27006-7.1.3Technical knowledge requirements
27006-7.5Surveillance Audits
27006-7.6Recertification Audit
27006-8.1Certification Decision
27006-8.2Suspension, Withdrawal, Reduction
27006-8.2.3Referencing other standards
27006-9.1Complaints and Appeals
27006-9.1.3.3Remote audit provisions
27006-9.2Management System Requirements
27006-9.3Initial certification
27006-9.3.2.2Certification decision process
27006-A.1Auditor Competence Areas
27006-B.1Audit Time Determination
27006-CAudit time guidance
27006-DAudit time calculation methods
27006-EControls alignment
ISO-15189-6.6Reagents and consumables
ISO-17025-5.2Management structure
ISO-17025-5.3Range of laboratory activities
ISO-17025-5.5Independence of quality functions
ISO-17025-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-17025-6.6Externally provided products and services
Show the 9 you already have
27006-9.4Surveillance and recertification
ISO-15189-6.7Service agreements
ISO-15189-6.8Externally provided products and services
ISO-17025-5.1Legal entity
ISO-17025-5.4Personnel for the management system
ISO-15189-6.3Facilities and environmental conditions
ISO-15189-6.5Equipment calibration and metrological traceability
ISO-17025-6.5Metrological traceability
How this is calculated
Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 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