Comment planifiez-vous et exécutez-vous les audits et les examens IAM ?

When planning and executing IAM (Identity and Access Management) audits and reviews, I follow a structured, systematic approach to ensure compliance, security, and alignment with organizational policies. Here's an outline of my process: 1.Define Scope and Objectives: I begin by identifying the audit's purpose, whether it's focused on regulatory compliance, security improvement, or operational efficiency. I establish the scope, including specific systems, roles, and user groups, ensuring alignment with business goals and risk management frameworks. 2.GatherRequirements: I work closely with key stakeholders—such as IT, Security, Compliance, and Business Units—to understand their requirements and any regulatory or internal policy obligations.

Primeiramente, estar alinhado com os objetivos do negócio. Ou seja, entender se o objetivo é regulatório, garantir eficiência operacional, melhoria dos processos de segurança, etc. O processo pode parecer um pouco tedioso, mas é extremamente estratégico e importante pra qualquer organização. Depois, definir os escopo e garantir uma fonte segura de coleta de informações. Manter uma fonte segura de evidências nesse processo é essencial. Por fim, uma boa comunicação com as partes envolvidas no processo é importante para garantir um processo íntegro e sem gargalos.

The first step in IAM audits and reviews is to define the scope and objectives, which might seem tedious but is crucial. By specifying what you’ll assess—like roles, permissions, and access controls—you prevent chaos and missed details. Set clear objectives, such as verifying compliance or identifying issues, to avoid aimless audits. Defining criteria and standards upfront might feel like overplanning, but it actually saves time and ensures thoroughness. Surprisingly, this meticulous prep makes the audit smoother, more effective, and highlights hidden weaknesses you might overlook otherwise.

In my experience, scope and objectives largely (still) follow a compliance-driven focus. Yes - compliance-related audits are important to achieve regulatory and statutory compliance. And - risk driven audits are essential to continually assessing against a changing threat landscape. If I might offer one objective, it would be 'identity first cyber security'.

In my experience, commencing IAM audits involves a strategic delineation of scope and objectives. This meticulous process entails a granular identification of pivotal assets, roles, and policies. Collaborating closely with stakeholders ensures not only alignment with overarching business objectives but also adherence to stringent compliance standards and nuanced access controls. This approach yields a finely tuned IAM audit, tailored to the specific intricacies of regulatory frameworks.

A coleta de dados em uma auditoria é uma etapa muito importante, por isso é preciso ter a conscientização e orientação clara sobre a necessidade de conservar a integridade da evidência, exibindo data e hora da coleta, bem como meios de garantir que o artefato está íntegro.

Continuous availability of 'audit-ready' data and evidence is imperative. Time and time again institutions are built around the collection of evidence and data that audit can rely on. We all strive for continuous compliance and in-line auditing, and it continues to be the unachievable goal. My suggesting is something in-between. Understand what audit can rely on for evidence and data, then make moderate investments to achieve those goals. The return on investment will show in operational effectiveness and productivity improvements for reinvestment.

Without wishing to sound like the harbinger of doom: Beware the samples and examples. What I mean is, asking for recent examples of a user onboarding, an access review, or a leave event isn't good enough. That's the approach a very large global consultancy took with a recent customer we worked with. In a surprise to absolutely no-one, the examples they were given were examples of the processes working perfectly. Of course they were! It's a lot like if you ask me for a reference: I'm not going to offer up someone that thinks I'm anything less than an absolute rockstar! Random samples over a long period. Look for the outliers. If you're offered specific examples, ask for the 25 before and 25 after the one you're offered. It works.

As a consultant, I once worked with a company that thought their IAM system was flawless. They only wanted a quick audit. I insisted we gather all the data: policies, logs, user access, and interviewed key stakeholders. They thought I was overdoing it, but I pushed forward. During our deep dive, we uncovered hidden access permissions that allowed former employees to access sensitive data. This shocked the management. Our thorough data collection not only saved them from potential breaches but also highlighted the importance of detailed audits. Sometimes, digging deep is the only way to find hidden gold—and hidden dangers.

As a consultant, I once faced a client confident in their IAM system. They saw no need for an in-depth analysis, believing their program was solid. I insisted on a comprehensive SWOT analysis using gap analysis, root cause analysis, and risk assessment. They were skeptical, thinking it was over-analysis. But during the process, we discovered significant gaps in their compliance and security practices. What they saw as strengths were actually vulnerabilities. This revelation was shocking to them but proved essential. It transformed their IAM strategy, showing that rigorous analysis isn’t overkill—it’s necessary to uncover and address hidden risks, ensuring true robustness.

As an IAM leader, I treat results and recommendations as planned work. You know there is an audit, you know there will be improvements to be made. I consider results and recommendations as ways to improve the quality of IAM services and as a continuously improving organization, use these results to make things better over time.

O resultado de uma auditoria é um material rico de identificação de melhorias de processos, políticas, configurações e estratégia. As recomendações e apontamento dão insumo de melhoria e continuamente, sendo que é sempre buscando um nível mais alto de segurança e qualidade.

In managing Identity and Access Management (IAM), audits and reviews are crucial. First, I'd establish clear audit objectives, focusing on compliance and security. Then, I'd conduct regular access reviews, ensuring permissions align with roles. Automation plays a key role, utilizing tools to streamline the process and detect anomalies. Periodic assessments of user accounts, permissions, and system logs are essential. Continuous monitoring helps identify and address issues promptly. Collaboration with stakeholders ensures a comprehensive understanding of access needs. Regular training keeps the team informed about security policies and best practices. Flexibility is key—adapting strategies based on evolving risks and technology.

Having the right team in place to plan and execute IAM audit / reviews is the key. If you don't have the right team in place, or your outsourcer isn't putting the A team forward then reach out to the team at DCL Search. Contact me directly on 07884666351 chris.holt@dclsearch.com

Comprehensive and detailed audits can be valuable in establishing a baseline. However with the time and resource required to complete a thorough audit you need a more nimble approach. Implementing access reviews, real-time reporting, and automated workflows can ensure you keep your finger on the pulse of day-to-day activities as opposed to conducting annual retrospectives.