Framework overlap

Does PCI PIN Security cover Oregon Consumer Privacy Act?

You hold PCI PIN Security and have been told to do Oregon Consumer Privacy Act. Here is how much overlaps, control by control.

75% of Oregon Consumer Privacy Act you already have

PCI PIN Security already covers about 75% of Oregon Consumer Privacy Act, leaving 2 of 8 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 6 New work 2

No control in PCI PIN Security maps directly to one in Oregon Consumer Privacy Act. 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 PCI PIN Security reaches these. This is the list to scope.

OREGONCPA-1
Applicability, Scope, Privacy Notice Content
OREGONCPA-6
Data Minimisation, Purpose Limitation, Retention
Show the 6 you already have
OREGONCPA-2
Consumer Rights: Access, Correction, Deletion, Portability, Opt-Out
OREGONCPA-3
Consent, Sensitive Data, Children and Teen Protections
OREGONCPA-4
Universal Opt-Out, Targeted Advertising, Profiling
OREGONCPA-5
Data Protection Assessments, Privacy by Design, Security Practices
OREGONCPA-7
Processor Contracts, Cross-Border Transfers, DPAs
OREGONCPA-8
Cure Period, Attorney General Enforcement, Training, Compliance Monitoring

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in PCI PIN Security 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