COMPLIANCE MAPPING

Your engineering practices
are your compliance evidence

Concordance maps every SDLC maturity score to the SOC 2 and ISO 27001 controls it produces evidence for. Not a static crosswalk — a live signal computed from your actual repositories and project trackers.

See Your MappingView All 50 Standards

Why maturity scoring beats binary compliance checks

Traditional GRC tools ask: “Is branch protection enabled?” and record pass/fail. Concordance asks: “How well is it configured, enforced, and practiced?” and scores 1–5 with evidence depth.

Binary check (traditional GRC)
Branch protection: ENABLED
PR reviews required: YES
CI pipeline exists: YES
Tells you the checkbox is ticked. Not whether reviews are meaningful or CI has useful tests.
Maturity signal (Concordance)
Branch Protection: 4.2 (Managed)
PR Review Quality: 2.8 (Defined)
CI Gating: 1.6 (Reactive)
Branch protection strong but reviews lack depth and CI not gating. CC8.1 signal: moderate — auditor will follow up.

Signal strength: from scores to compliance confidence

Each control maps to multiple SDLC standards. Concordance averages the maturity scores to produce a signal strength — your evidence confidence for that control.

Strong
Avg: 3.5–5.0
Evidence depth supports audit confidence.
Moderate
Avg: 2.0–3.4
Some evidence but gaps remain. Auditor will ask follow-ups.
Weak
Avg: 1.0–1.9
Minimal evidence. Control depends on manual processes.
None
Avg: No data
No mapped standards scored. Cannot assess.

Control-to-Standard Mapping

Select a framework and explore which SDLC standards feed evidence into each control. Every standard is scored automatically from your connected tools.

13 controls mapped to 31 SDLC standards
🔐
CC6Logical & Physical Access Controls
5 controls · 8 standards
📊
CC7System Operations
5 controls · 12 standards
🔄
CC8Change Management
1 control · 13 standards
🔁
A1Availability
2 controls · 7 standards

What Concordance does not cover

Concordance focuses on SDLC controls evidenced by engineering tools. These SOC 2 criteria require other sources.

CC1.1–CC1.5Control EnvironmentBoard oversight, governance, HR policies
CC2.1–CC2.3CommunicationSecurity awareness training, policy communication
CC3.1–CC3.4Risk AssessmentRisk registers, threat modeling programs
CC4.1–CC4.2Monitoring ActivitiesInternal audit, control effectiveness reviews
CC5.1–CC5.3Control ActivitiesPolicy deployment, IT governance
CC9.1–CC9.2Risk MitigationBusiness continuity, vendor management

We are transparent about boundaries. Concordance tells you what it can evidence and where you need supplementary sources.

From repositories to compliance confidence

1
Connect
Link your GitHub, Linear, or Jira. Read-only. We scan repos, PRs, issues, workflows, releases.
2
Score
Each of 50 SDLC standards is scored 1–5 based on evidence depth, not configuration state. Level 3 means the practice is defined and followed, not just enabled.
3
Map
Every score maps to SOC 2 and ISO 27001 controls. Compliance tags appear on every result, even free tier.
4
Signal
Signal strength aggregates scores per control. Strong = auditor confidence. Weak = you know exactly where to improve.

See your compliance mapping now

Connect your GitHub, Linear, or Jira and see which compliance controls your engineering practices produce evidence for. Free tier includes compliance tags on every standard.

Get Started FreeLearn About SignalView Framework