AC-5 Separation of duties
Requires the organization to identify and document the individual duties that must be kept apart to limit malevolent activity without collusion, and to define system access authorizations so that those duties cannot be e
4
artefacts
1
held by a system
0
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
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
- Toxic combination report from the identity system or a manual conflict analysis · Identity provider / directory
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
none for this control
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Documented conflicting duty pairs for the mission and system in question · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Role definitions and entitlement mapping showing conflicting duties are not held together · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Approved exceptions with the compensating detective controls applied · 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
- Conflicting duties named for finance processes only and never for system administration
- Small teams create unavoidable conflicts that are tolerated rather than documented and compensated
- Separation enforced at role definition but broken by direct entitlement grants
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