Named by 4 frameworks

Evidence is point in time rather than ongoing

4 of the 723 frameworks in our corpus warn about this same failure, across 44 separate controls. That convergence is the measurement: it is not one standard's opinion.

Data measured , page built 22 September 2026 at 16:18 UTC.

4 standards bodies wrote this down separately. None of them consulted the others. That is not a preference you can argue with, it is what happens.From 44 controls across our corpus

AS9100D Aerospace Quality Management System Evidence & Implementation Kit

This is the complete documentation set: an adopt-ready artifact for every control in policy and procedure text you edit rather than draft, and the evidence checklist an auditor asks for against each.

See what is in it, $249

The same set every buyer of this kit receives. Nothing here is produced on request.

Who warns about it

Every framework below independently names this failure. They were written by different bodies, in different jurisdictions, for different industries, and they agree.

What an auditor asks for

The artefacts named on the controls that warn about this failure. This is what closes it, and what you will be asked to produce when somebody checks.

What closing it also buys you

The 59 controls that warn about this failure map onto controls in other frameworks. Close them here and this much of each of those is closed too. It is the same work counted once, which is usually the difference between a programme that finishes and one that does not.

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 59
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.024
BSI IT-Grundschutz10
ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents48
Belgium CyberFundamentals38
PCI PIN Security4
ISO/IEC 23894:202312
PCI SSF9
CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.042
ISO/IEC 27043:201514
FFIEC IT Examination Handbook2
PCI P2PE3

Scaled against the framework this reaches furthest into, not against a hundred percent. Exact figures below.

Also progressesCovered Controls reached
NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5
United States
9.7%31 of 320
NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
United States
24.5%26 of 106
BSI IT-Grundschutz
Germany (used across the German-speaking countries and by German public bodies under the UP Bund)
10.0%18 of 180
ASD Strategies to Mitigate Cyber Security Incidents
Australia
48.6%18 of 37
Belgium CyberFundamentals
Belgium
38.6%17 of 44
PCI PIN Security
Global (PCI Security Standards Council; acquirers and their agents processing PINs, key-injection facilities and certification authorities)
4.0%16 of 399
ISO/IEC 23894:2023
International
12.4%15 of 121
PCI SSF
Global (PCI Security Standards Council; payment software vendors seeking validation and listing)
9.6%15 of 156
CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPG) 2.0
United States
42.9%15 of 35
ISO/IEC 27043:2015
International (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27)
14.0%14 of 100
FFIEC IT Examination Handbook
United States (FRB, FDIC, NCUA, OCC and state banking supervisors)
2.6%14 of 538
PCI P2PE
Global (PCI Security Standards Council; P2PE solution providers, component providers, application vendors and merchants operating merchant-managed solutions)
3.4%14 of 407

Read as: closing this failure reaches that share of the named framework's control library through cross-framework mappings held in our corpus. It is not a claim of compliance with that framework, it is a measure of how much of it you have already touched.

Where this comes from

Harvested from the control library itself. Every control in our corpus carries the evidence an auditor expects and the ways implementations commonly fail, recorded when that control was verified against its source document. This page is those two fields, for one failure, across every framework that names it.

The overlap is computed by traversing 332,959 cross-framework control mappings out from the specific controls that warn about this failure, not from the frameworks they sit in. Those mappings were built control by control against source documents.

Nothing here is inferred, predicted or scored. The number at the top is a count of frameworks.

Where this goes next

  1. The other failures the whole industry independently agrees on:The full catalogue →
  2. Everything else AS9100D asks for, and what it overlaps with:AS9100D in full →
  3. Which companies are disclosing the events this failure produces:Who disclosed it →
  4. What changed in those disclosures this week:What changed →
  5. And today's story, which is usually one of these arriving in public:Today's edition →

All failure modes ยท The index