Cloud adoption continues to grow as organizations seek agility, scale, and cost efficiency. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is one of the most widely used cloud platforms, hosting critical workloads and sensitive data. But moving to the cloud does not eliminate security or compliance responsibilities; it changes who is accountable for what. That’s why the AWS shared responsibility model exists.

 

Understanding this model is essential for security teams, compliance leaders, and auditors. Misunderstanding responsibility boundaries is a common source of compliance gaps, audit findings, and security incidents. 

 

In this guide, we explain the model clearly, tie it directly to compliance frameworks, and outline practical steps organizations can take in 2026 to manage cloud security and compliance with confidence.

 

 

What is the AWS shared responsibility model?

 

The AWS shared responsibility model defines the division of security and compliance duties between AWS and the customer.

 

• AWS is responsible for the security of the cloud: The infrastructure that runs AWS services.

 

• The customer is responsible for security in the cloud: Everything they deploy, configure, and manage.

 

This simple distinction helps organizations know what they must secure and what AWS secures for them.

 

The model applies across different services, from virtual machines to managed databases. AWS handles the underlying infrastructure, while customers manage operating systems, data, user access, and configurations.

 

AWS responsibilities: Security of the cloud

 

AWS is responsible for protecting the infrastructure that runs all of the services offered in the AWS Cloud. This includes:

 

• Physical security of data centers.
• Hardware and networking infrastructure.
• Virtualization layer and hypervisors.
• Managed services like AWS Lambda, Amazon RDS, AWS S3.

 

Because AWS manages and controls these layers, it is appropriate that AWS also demonstrates compliance for them. AWS maintains a broad set of third-party certifications and audit reports, such as:

 

• SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3 reports.
• ISO 27001, ISO 27017, ISO 27018.
• PCI DSS validation for specific services.
• FedRAMP authorization for U.S. federal workloads.

 

These reports document how AWS controls and monitors the security of its infrastructure and are available through AWS Artifact, a self-service portal for compliance documentation.

 

It’s important to emphasize that AWS provides this evidence for infrastructure controls, but organizations must still produce their own evidence for controls they manage.

 

 

Customer responsibilities: Security in the cloud

 

While AWS secures the infrastructure, customers are responsible for securing everything they deploy or configure. This often includes:

 

• Identity and access management (IAM).
• Operating system and patch management.
• Network configuration (ACLs, security groups, firewalls).
• Data protection (encryption, backups).
• Logging, monitoring, and incident response.
• Application configuration and vulnerabilities.

 

For example, if a customer runs an Amazon EC2 instance, AWS ensures the hypervisor and host are secure. The customer must decide how the guest operating system is configured, what patches are applied, and who can access it.

 

This split responsibility is consistent across IaaS, PaaS, and containerized architectures; it’s just the surface area that changes.

 

Quick link: Hybrid cloud security for businesses

 

Why the AWS shared responsibility model matters for compliance

 

Compliance accountability always remains with the organization, not AWS. Even if AWS maintains certifications for its infrastructure, it does not remove the customer’s obligation to comply with laws, regulations, and frameworks.

 

Here’s why:

 

• Auditors evaluate the organization’s controls, not AWS’s infrastructure controls, when assessing compliance.

 

• When workloads process regulated data (e.g., personal information under GDPR, payment card data under PCI DSS), the organization must demonstrate that data is classified, configured, encrypted, and monitored correctly.

 

• Shared responsibility is not shared liability; organizations bear consequences for misconfigurations or incomplete controls.

 

For example, in a SOC 2 audit, auditors assess controls like logical access, change management, and monitoring. If a customer fails to enforce strong access controls on AWS IAM roles, that is a customer control failure, not an AWS one.

 

Similarly, under ISO 27001, the organization must implement and document customer controls for asset management, access control, and security monitoring. ISO 27001 compliance for AWS only covers AWS’s infrastructure. Auditors expect evidence mapping from customer processes to ISO controls.

 

Strong documentation and clear ownership boundaries are essential during compliance reviews.

 

Mapping the Amazon shared responsibility model to compliance frameworks

 

Below are examples of how AWS shared responsibility intersects with well-known frameworks:

 

SOC 2

 

AWS provides SOC reports for infrastructure controls. Customer must implement and document their own controls, including: 

 

• IAM policies.
• Logging and monitoring configurations.
• Incident response procedures.

 

ISO 27001

 

AWS’s certification covers infrastructure security. The customer must implement controls related to:

 

• Asset inventory.
• Information classification.
• Access restrictions.
• Cryptographic protections.

 

NIST CSF / NIST 800-53

 

AWS handles foundational infrastructure protections. Customers must manage configuration, monitoring, and risk-based policies.

 

GDPR

 

AWS operates as a data processor for many services. The customer is often the data controller and must ensure lawful processing, consent management, and data subject rights.

 

Across all these frameworks, auditors focus on the customer side of controls, which directly ties to shared responsibility.

 

Common compliance risks caused by misunderstanding shared responsibility

 

Many compliance gaps arise when organizations assume AWS handles more than it actually does. Common traps include:

 

• Assuming AWS manages IAM policies. IAM is the customer’s responsibility.
• Believing AWS handles encryption keys, key management depends on configuration.
• Doing minimal logging and monitoring, customers must enable and retain logs.
• Not documenting control ownership, auditors require traceable evidence.

 

These gaps often surface during formal audits or when responding to security incidents.

 

Manage AWS shared responsibility with CyberArrow

 

The AWS shared responsibility model is foundational for cloud security and compliance. It clarifies what AWS secures and what customers must secure, but it also demands structured oversight, documentation, and evidence, especially when facing auditors or regulators.

 

CyberArrow helps organizations manage this complexity by enabling teams to:

 

• Centralize cloud and compliance risk management.
• Map compliance responsibilities to compliance frameworks.
• Track control, ownership, and accountability
• Automate evidence collection for audits.
• Maintain continuous audit readiness.

 

Teams can reduce risk and confidently demonstrate control effectiveness by aligning shared responsibility with governance and compliance workflows.

 

 

FAQs