What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on IAM-01 Identity and Access Management Policy and Procedures?

Identity and access management policy and supporting procedures with approval and version history; Policy sections covering provisioning, change and removal of access, authentication rules, least privilege, separation of duties, privileged access and access reviews; Shared responsibility statement showing which access controls sit with the provider and which with the customer; Record of the last yearly review and any review after a significant change.

What is the most common gap auditors find on IAM-01?

Policy lacks a section on non-human or service identities

CSA CCM v4.1 · IAM - Identity & Access Management

`IAM-01` Identity and Access Management Policy and Procedures

Keep approved, communicated and enforced policies and procedures governing identity and access management, put into practice, and keep them reviewed every year and again whenever a significant change occurs.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, IAM-01. 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 CSA CCM v4.1 in the compliance library.

Version 4.1 adds 11 controls (among them API security, log sanitisation and a service bill of materials) and renumbers several domains. CSA accepts v4.0.x during its transition; if your STAR assessment is still on v4.0.1, check the numbering against it.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Record of the last yearly review and any review after a significant change · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Identity and access management policy and supporting procedures with approval and version history · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Policy sections covering provisioning, change and removal of access, authentication rules, least privilege, separation of duties, privileged access and access reviews · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Shared responsibility statement showing which access controls sit with the provider and which with the customer · Document repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Policy lacks a section on non-human or service identities
Shared responsibility split for access management not documented
No evidence the policy is applied in the systems it governs

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

I&S-09 Network Defense · IAM-02 Credentials Management Policy and Procedures