How One Company Strengthened Compliance with Access Reviews and IAM Risk Management

The Compliance Wake-Up Call

Midland Tech, a fast-growing financial services firm, had just received a notice from its external auditors: their SOX user access review process was incomplete and poorly documented. The IT and compliance teams knew they had to act quickly. Failure could result in audit findings and regulatory penalties.

Drafting the User Access Review Policy

The compliance officer, Priya, realized the problem started with the absence of a formal user access review policy. Managers didn’t know who was responsible, or how often reviews should be performed.

She and her team drafted a policy that:

• Defined roles and responsibilities.

• Mandated quarterly reviews for critical systems.

• Included escalation paths for non-compliance.

This document became the foundation for accountability.

The Struggle with Manual SOX User Access Reviews

When the first review cycle began, the IT team exported spreadsheets of users across dozens of applications. Managers were overwhelmed. Some rubber-stamped approvals without checking, while others delayed, creating audit gaps.

The auditors flagged the lack of evidence. Priya knew that without better processes, the company would remain non-compliant.

Introducing IAM Risk Management

At the same time, cybersecurity risks were growing. Midland Tech’s CIO emphasized that compliance alone wasn’t enough—they needed stronger IAM risk management.

The risk assessment revealed:

• Orphaned accounts from departed employees.

• Excessive admin privileges for temporary contractors.

• Inconsistent access across departments.

These risks could lead to insider threats or data breaches if left unresolved.

The Turning Point: Automation

Recognizing the need for efficiency, Midland Tech adopted an identity governance solution. A platform like Securends automated the review process by:

• Routing tasks to managers.

• Flagging high-risk accounts.

• Collecting immutable evidence for audits.

For the first time, managers reviewed access with context, not confusion.

The Next Audit Cycle

During the next SOX user access review, auditors were impressed. Evidence was centralized, timestamps were clear, and exceptions had documented justifications.

Most importantly, IAM risk management became continuous. Privileged accounts were monitored daily, and terminated users were automatically flagged for removal.

Lessons Learned

Midland Tech’s journey taught them:

1. A strong user access review policy creates structure.

2. Manual reviews cannot scale and lead to audit failures.

3. SOX user access reviews require rigor, documentation, and timeliness.

4. IAM risk management is not optional—it protects against real threats.

5. Automation transforms compliance from a burden into a manageable process.

Final Reflection

What began as a near compliance failure turned into an opportunity for Midland Tech to mature its governance framework. By combining policy, audit discipline, and risk-focused IAM practices, they not only satisfied auditors but also strengthened their security posture.

For organizations navigating similar challenges, solutions like Securends prove that compliance and risk management can work hand in hand.