What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on LT-2 Enable threat detection for identity and access management?

Sign-in and audit log collection from the identity provider; Detection rules for failed login bursts, impossible travel and dormant account use; Alert routing to the security operations team; Triage records for identity alerts.

What is the most common gap auditors find on LT-2?

identity logs collected but no detection rules written

Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark) · Logging and Threat Detection

`LT-2` Enable threat detection for identity and access management

Detect identity and access threats by monitoring user and application sign-in and access anomalies, alerting on patterns such as excessive failed logins and deprecated accounts.

Source: Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark), LT-2. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark) in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

easy

to go live

SIEM / log platform

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Sign-in and audit log collection from the identity provider · SIEM / log platform
Detection rules for failed login bursts, impossible travel and dormant account use · Identity provider / directory
Alert routing to the security operations team · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Triage records for identity alerts · SIEM / log platform

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

none for this control

First move

Automate the pull from your SIEM / log platform. Retention and alert rules exported from the SIEM; review evidence is the closed-alert record with reviewer and time.

Common gaps auditors find

identity logs collected but no detection rules written
service principal and application sign-ins excluded from monitoring
alerts fire but no responder owns identity incidents

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

LT-1 Enable threat detection capabilities · LT-3 Enable logging for security investigation