The primary component to determine the success or failure of an organization's cloud compliance program is mapping who possesses the information and data that should drive the compliance goals. This is because the cloud compliance program should be aligned with the organization's business objectives and risk appetite, and the information and data that support these objectives and risks are often distributed across different cloud service providers, business units, and stakeholders. Therefore, it is essential to identify who owns, controls, and accesses the information and data, and how they are protected, processed, and shared in the cloud environment. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-02: Data Governance, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage data throughout its lifecycle in accordance with regulatory requirements, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 Reference := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 53

Termination for convenience is a contractual provision that allows one party to unilaterally terminate the contract without the fault of the other party. This type of termination does not require the terminating party to prove that the other party has failed to meet their obligations or is at fault in any way. Instead, it is often used to end a contract when it is no longer in the best interest of the terminating party to continue, for reasons that may include changes in business strategy, financial considerations, or other external factors.
Reference = The concept of termination for convenience is commonly found in various contractual agreements and is a standard clause in government contracts, allowing the government to terminate a contract when it is deemed to be in the public interest. While the search did not yield specific CCAK documents detailing this type of termination, it is a well-established principle in contract law and is likely covered under the broader topic of contract management within the CCAK curriculum.

Organizations maintain mappings between the different control frameworks they adopt to avoid duplication of work when assessing compliance. This is because different control frameworks may have overlapping or equivalent controls that address the same objectives or risks. By mapping these controls, organizations can streamline their compliance assessment process and reduce the cost and effort involved. Mappings also help organizations to identify any gaps or inconsistencies in their control coverage and address them accordingly. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-03: Control Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and adopt applicable control frameworks, standards, and best practices to support the cloud compliance program."1 Reference := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 54