Japan ISMAP Cloud Security Assessments (TISAX unreadable)

Where this market publishes its structure

• ISMAP cloud service list (www.ismap.go.jp/csm?id=cloud_service_list; browser-rendered public page) machine-readable, 103 registered services; 51 linked to 33 providers (concur out of market); 6 held; 45 services have no catalog repo
• ISMAP-LIU cloud service list (www.ismap.go.jp/csm?id=cloud_service_list_liu) machine-readable, 4 low-impact services; 1 linked (sansan); 3 no catalog repo

Own = declares at least one integration itself; covered = visible only because an aggregator, standards body, regulator or partner contract names it; distribution-only = listed only on cloud marketplaces it sells through, a channel reported beside, never counted as its own declared integrations; undeclared = nothing we can read, so no number; declares_compatibility = providers with a `compatible` shape vote, report only (kin, 2026-10-13): never counted as own, never in depth or position.

Taxonomy how this market maps onto apis.io

Derived 2026-10-23 from the 61 providers in this market we could resolve in the catalog. The percentage is the share of those providers carrying each one; it describes the market, not the tag or industry. Tag groups have no page of their own yet, so they are listed unlinked.

share of resolved cohort carrying it; tags >=0.20 & >=3 members (max 12, junk dropped), tag_groups >=0.20 (cooccurrence, non-cross-cutting; max 8), industries >=0.20 (max 6), areas >=0.10 (max 6; areas are keyword-matched and sparse), capabilities L1 >=0.20 (max 8); derive-market-taxonomy.py

Leaders by position (provisional)

Provisional: grouped by position, depth compared within a position only. Distribution (cloud marketplaces) and iPaaS bridges are counted beside position, never inside it. Unknown-builder listings are left out of position shares and counted here.

undeclared 61 · declares nothing we can read: no number