What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on IDM-02 Granting and change of user accounts and access rights?

Provisioning workflow definition covering joiners, movers and technical accounts; Sample of completed access request tickets showing requested role and recorded approver; Export of entitlements granted during the period reconciled against approved requests; Screenshot of the request form fields that force selection from the defined role catalogue.

What is the most common gap auditors find on IDM-02?

Entitlements set directly in the target system, bypassing the request workflow entirely

BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) · C5: Identity and Access Management

`IDM-02` Granting and change of user accounts and access rights

Operate defined procedures for issuing and amending accounts and entitlements for internal staff, external staff and automated system components, so that every grant or change demonstrably conforms to the approved role and rights concept.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), IDM-02. 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 BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) in the compliance library.

The edition of the catalogue is not stamped here; check the edition your attestation is issued against.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

to go live

Identity provider / directory

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

Export of entitlements granted during the period reconciled against approved requests · Identity provider / directory

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Sample of completed access request tickets showing requested role and recorded approver · Identity provider / directory

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Provisioning workflow definition covering joiners, movers and technical accounts · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Screenshot of the request form fields that force selection from the defined role catalogue · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Identity provider / directory); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Entitlements set directly in the target system, bypassing the request workflow entirely
Requester and approver are the same person on a portion of sampled requests
Roles entered as free text instead of catalogue values, producing entitlements outside the concept

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

IDM-01 Policy for user accounts and access rights · IDM-03 Locking and withdrawal of user accounts in the event of inactivity or multiple failed logins