What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on IDM-06 Privileged access rights?

Inventory of privileged roles stating the risk-based validity period set for each; Mapping of every technical user to the responsible named employee; Privileged session logs together with the alert rules configured over them; Records of raised alerts, the misuse assessment performed and any disciplinary follow-up.

What is the most common gap auditors find on IDM-06?

Shared administrator credentials in daily use, so actions cannot be traced to a person

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

`IDM-06` Privileged access rights

Issue privileged access personally and for a risk-based limited period, tie each technical user to a named individual, log privileged activity, alert responsible personnel automatically on defined misuse indicators, and apply disciplinary measures where misuse is proven.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), IDM-06. 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

Privileged session logs together with the alert rules configured over them · Identity provider / directory

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Records of raised alerts, the misuse assessment performed and any disciplinary follow-up · SIEM / log platform

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Inventory of privileged roles stating the risk-based validity period set for each · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Mapping of every technical user to the responsible named employee · HR system / LMS

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

Shared administrator credentials in daily use, so actions cannot be traced to a person
Elevated rights granted open-ended despite a stated requirement for time limitation
Privileged activity is collected centrally but no rule notifies an accountable owner

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-05 Regular review of access rights · IDM-07 Access to cloud customer data