Xcitium offering

Information Security Gap Assessment

Mapping current controls to a selected framework. The assessment maps policies, evidence and implemented controls to the selected framework: NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 27001:2022, CIS Controls or SOC 2.

Discuss your requirements ↗

Team mapping security controls to documented evidence

Security control assessment

From framework to prioritized roadmap

Current policies and controls are assessed against a selected framework; evidence-backed gaps are prioritized into a practical improvement plan.

How the work flows

Authorized scope

Choose the framework and scope

Selected framework
Organization boundary
Assessment type

Agreed assessment framework

Example review questions

Control areaEvidence reviewedGap analysisNext action and ownership

Access managementRoles and rights registerCompare least privilege with review practiceAssign an owner for rights reviews

Asset managementAsset registerCheck coverage and asset ownershipReconcile the asset register

Incident responseResponse plan and exercise recordsCheck escalation and assigned rolesAssign a plan update and exercise

Prioritized security control gaps · Prioritized assessment report in the portal

Choose the framework and scope

The project starts with NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 27001:2022, CIS Controls, SOC 2 or another agreed framework. Organizational boundaries, assessment type and main risk priorities shape how responses will be interpreted.

Assessment basis

Selected framework
Organization boundary
Assessment type

Assessment stages

Choose the framework
Set the scope

Deliverable

Agreed assessment framework

Gather control evidence

Responsible staff complete an online self-assessment questionnaire and provide relevant documents and information about controls. Administrative and technical responses help compare written descriptions with how safeguards operate in practice.

Assessment basis

Questionnaire responses
Policy documents
Control owners

Assessment stages

Collect responses
Review evidence

Deliverable

Reviewed control evidence

Analyze control gaps

Specialists compare existing controls with the selected framework and identify missing or partly implemented areas. Findings are ranked by severity and exploitability, while evidence gaps remain visible when interpreting the results.

Assessment basis

Framework requirements
Submitted evidence
Control responses

Assessment stages

Map the controls
Prioritize gaps

Deliverable

Prioritized security control gaps

Build an improvement roadmap

The report lists prioritized steps and owners, with access through the dedicated reporting portal. In a self-assessment, specialists analyze the responses; the external-audit option adds a formal third-party review of controls. Leaders then set resources and sequence.

Assessment basis

Prioritized gaps
Control owners
Available resources

Assessment stages

Select next steps
Assign ownership

Deliverable

Prioritized assessment report in the portal

The framework-aligned report connects control gaps to priorities and gives control owners a clear sequence for security improvements.

Capabilities

Fit the way your team works

Core capabilities

The assessment maps policies, evidence and implemented controls to the selected framework: NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 27001:2022, CIS Controls or SOC 2.

Deployment and fit

The output is a prioritized gap list, not certification or attestation. Documents and interviews depend on the agreed project scope.

Compare approaches

Service role and adjacent approach

Consideration	Information security gap assessment	Penetration testing
Primary focus	Gaps against selected requirements.	Test agreed technical targets for exploitable weaknesses.
Workflow	Review documents, interviews and control evidence.	Targeted attack tests and validation of impact.
Output and handoff	Prioritized improvement roadmap.	Technical findings and remediation context.

Before you start

Set the assessment boundary

Agree the framework, organizational unit, evidence sources and decision use; arrange legal or audit attestation separately.

01
Which framework applies: NIST, ISO 27001 or another?
02
Which policies, evidence owners and interviewees are in scope?
03
Who prioritizes findings and accepts risk?

Evidence for your evaluation

Information security gap assessment

Framework choice, self-assessment, external review and improvement plan.

In practice

Comparing controls with a selected framework

An organization wants to compare current policies and controls with NIST, ISO 27001 or another agreed framework. The project first defines the framework, teams, documents and interview participants.

What your team gains

01
Framework-aligned prioritized gaps
02
Control status visibility
03
Improvement next steps

Before you decide

Questions, answered

What does the gap assessment compare?

Policies and implemented controls are mapped to the requirements of a selected framework.

Is the result a certification?

No. The output is a gap assessment and prioritized actions; certification and audit attestation are separate processes.

What evidence is needed?

Scope can include documents, control evidence and interviews with responsible owners.

Next step

Discuss your requirements

Tell us about your environment and priorities to discuss the right solution, pilot scope and rollout in Azerbaijan.

Discuss your requirements ↗

Information Security Gap Assessment

Choose the framework and scope

Choose the framework and scope

Gather control evidence

Analyze control gaps

Build an improvement roadmap

Fit the way your team works

Core capabilities

Deployment and fit

Set the assessment boundary

Evidence for your evaluation

Information security gap assessment↗

Comparing controls with a selected framework

Discuss your requirements

Information security gap assessment