PAA vs Audit41
Audit41 assesses your gap to the framework. PAA proves the architecture underneath it.
Audit41 is a NIS2 and ISO 27001 gap assessment, built by practising auditors and calibrated across hundreds of real engagements. It is genuinely good at what it does: mapping your organisation against the framework and running the audit workflow. But it works from self-assessment — what your team reports. PAA works from the live tenant. It reads your actual Azure and M365 configuration and proves whether the security measures behind those answers are real. Two halves of the same directive.
| Aspect | PAA | Audit41 |
|---|---|---|
| Primary job | Prove the live architecture | Assess the gap to the framework |
| Question answered | Is it built right — really? | Where do we stand against NIS2 / ISO 27001? |
| How it knows | Reads your live Azure & M365 tenant | Self-assessment + auditor guidance |
| Scope | Azure + M365 + Zero Trust | NIS2, ISO 27001, NIST 800-53 — org-wide |
| Output | Findings + IaC + evidence | Gap report + audit workflow |
| Remediation | Terraform / Bicep generated | Guidance + auditor follow-up |
| Stays current | Scheduled re-scan + drift | Point-in-time self-check |
| Pricing | From €99/day · €799/mo | From €1,490/yr — annual commitment |
Audit41 Readiness lists four annual plans — Essentials €1,490, Professional €2,990, Programme €4,990, and custom Enterprise — each covering one framework on an annual commitment. Figures from their public site; verify on audit41.ai.
What Audit41 is genuinely for
Audit41 works top-down from the framework. Built by practising NIS2 and ISO 27001 auditors, with country-specific guidance across the EU — the Netherlands and Belgium included — it maps your organisation against the requirements and, through its audit-firm product, runs the engagement as a repeatable workflow. Crucially, it covers the parts of NIS2 that have nothing to do with cloud configuration: management-body accountability, the incident-reporting process, registration with the competent authority. PAA does none of that, and it is not a substitute for an auditor.
What PAA adds
PAA works bottom-up from your infrastructure. It reads your live Azure and M365 tenant and checks the configuration against what Microsoft’s own frameworks say good looks like — 800+ deterministic checks across Azure, M365 and Zero Trust, mapped per finding to NIS2, DORA and ISO 27001 Annex A. The output isn’t a control marked “assessed”; it’s the resource, the setting, whether it’s right, and the Terraform or Bicep to fix it.
Why self-report isn’t evidence
A self-check scores the answers you give and the documentation you upload — not the running system. It is only as accurate as what the people answering know and how honestly they answer, and a team that doesn’t know what it doesn’t know will score itself generously. The answer ages the moment the architecture changes. You can report “we enforce MFA” while a break-glass exclusion nobody remembers adding is still live, the storage account behind a green control is still public, and three subscriptions never got the policy. “Our checklist passed” is weaker evidence than “our architecture was assessed against the framework and mapped to Article 21.” PAA is the layer that produces the second kind.
They cover different halves of NIS2
This is the part most comparison pages skip. NIS2 Article 21 asks for technical and organisational measures both. Audit41 — or your auditor — is strong on the organisational and procedural side and the framework mapping. PAA proves the technical side: the live Azure and M365 architecture beneath the security measures, with the evidence and the fix. Run the gap assessment, then export PAA’s verified findings into the gap register or GRC tool that houses it. You don’t pick one — you stop confusing the two halves.
Lead with Audit41 when…
You need auditor-calibrated framework guidance and a gap register across the full scope of NIS2 or ISO 27001 — including the organisational and legal duties — or you’re an audit firm running engagements at scale.
Add PAA when…
You run on Azure and M365 and need the technical security measures behind those answers proven true — live configuration, real evidence and the remediation code — not self-reported, and re-checked for drift on a schedule.
Questions
Is PAA an Audit41 alternative?
Not exactly — they sit in different layers. Audit41 is a NIS2 and ISO 27001 gap assessment: built by practising auditors, it maps your organisation against the framework from self-reported answers and runs the audit workflow. PAA is architecture intelligence: it reads your live Azure and M365 tenant and proves whether the technical security measures behind those answers are actually true. Many Microsoft-cloud teams use a gap assessment for the framework and PAA for the architecture underneath it.
Does PAA cover NIS2 and ISO 27001?
PAA maps its technical findings to NIS2, DORA, ISO 27001 Annex A, GDPR and more, and produces the architecture evidence that underpins the security-measure controls. What it does not do is run an audit, give legal counsel, or cover the organisational duties — management-body accountability, the incident-reporting process, registration with the competent authority. PAA proves the technical half of the directive; a gap assessment or an auditor handles the rest.
Audit41 already tells me where I stand. Why add PAA?
A self-check reports what your team answers. It cannot see the MFA exclusion nobody remembers adding, the storage account that is still public, or the subscription that never got the policy — and its answers age the moment your architecture changes. PAA reads the live tenant, so the security-measure answers are backed by current technical evidence and the code to fix what is wrong, not by self-report.
Can I use PAA and Audit41 together?
Yes, and that is the natural fit. Audit41 — or your auditor — runs the framework mapping, the gap register and the organisational and legal side of NIS2. PAA proves the Azure and M365 architecture beneath the security measures is true and hands you the remediation code, then exports that evidence into your gap register or GRC tool. NIS2 Article 21 asks for technical and organisational measures both.
Assess the gap. Then prove it’s real.
A €99 Day Pass reads your live tenant and shows you what a self-check can’t.
