What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on OIS-04 Segregation of Duties?

Conflict matrix mapping incompatible functions to job roles and to system entitlements; Documented justification and acceptance for each duty conflict that cannot be separated; Configuration of the compensating monitoring rules plus evidence that someone reviews their output; Sample of change records showing different individuals built, tested and released the change.

What is the most common gap auditors find on OIS-04?

Developers retain standing deployment rights into the production environment

BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) · C5: Organisation of Information Security

`OIS-04` Segregation of Duties

Separate conflicting duties on the basis of the documented risk assessment, at minimum across rights administration and access approval, change development, testing and release, and system operation, and where separation is not feasible monitor those activities to detect misuse or unintended change.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), OIS-04. 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

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

Configuration of the compensating monitoring rules plus evidence that someone reviews their output · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Sample of change records showing different individuals built, tested and released the change · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Conflict matrix mapping incompatible functions to job roles and to system entitlements · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Documented justification and acceptance for each duty conflict that cannot be separated · Document repository

First move

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

Common gaps auditors find

Developers retain standing deployment rights into the production environment
Administrators raise and approve their own entitlement requests
Compensating monitoring defined on paper with no reviewer and no sign off
Analysis covers business applications only and ignores infrastructure operations

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

OIS-03 Interfaces and Dependencies · OIS-05 Contact with Relevant Government Agencies and Interest Groups