Establish and Document Periodic User Access Reviews for the Application - Application Management Best Practices
Establish and Document Periodic User Access Reviews for the Application
(Chapter 69 of Application Management Best Practices)
Executive Summary: Chapter Overview
IF4ITThe Bottom Line
Core Concepts
| Concept | Definition & Strategic Role |
|---|---|
| Access Drift | The gradual divergence of an Application’s actual access from what anyone intended, caused by role changes, departed contractors whose accounts remain, and temporary elevated access that becomes permanent. Periodic user access reviews exist to detect and correct it. |
| Risk-Based Review Frequency | Setting how often the Application’s access is reviewed according to its business criticality, regulatory classification, and data sensitivity, with privileged access reviewed more often. It ties review effort to the Application’s documented risk rather than to a single uniform schedule. |
| Orphaned Accounts | Accounts no longer linked to an active person or owner. Identifying them is an explicit part of each access review, alongside confirming that each active account is still needed and that each person’s roles and privileged access remain justified. |
| Access Review Evidence | The retained record of each review: what was reviewed, by whom, when, what was found, and what was removed. Produced as a normal part of operations, it satisfies auditors and regulators with minimal effort. |
Quick Q&A
Question: Who should review business users' access versus IT and privileged users' access to an Application?
Question: What happens to access review findings that cannot be resolved promptly?
Read More Below
This chapter explains how to establish and document periodic reviews of who has access to an Application, and whether they should.
Why Periodic Access Reviews Are Needed
Access accumulates. People change roles and keep their old access; contractors leave and their accounts remain; temporary elevated access becomes permanent. Over time, an Application’s actual access drifts away from what anyone intended. Periodic access reviews detect and correct that drift, and are frequently required by regulations and audit standards.
Establish Periodic User Access Reviews
Risk-based frequency. Set the review frequency according to the Application’s business criticality, regulatory classification, and data sensitivity, with privileged access reviewed more often.
The right reviewers. The Business Application Owner, or a delegate, reviews business users’ access; the IT Application Owner, or a delegate, reviews IT and privileged users’ access.
What is reviewed. Reviews confirm that each active account belongs to someone who still needs it, that each person’s roles are appropriate to their current job, that privileged access is justified, and that orphaned accounts (those no longer linked to an active person or owner) are identified.
Timely removal. Access identified as inappropriate is removed within a defined timeline.
Unresolved findings. Findings that cannot be resolved promptly are recorded as Risks.
Document and Share the Reviews
Record the access review procedure, frequency, and reviewers in the Application Documentation. Retain the evidence of each review, including what was reviewed, by whom, when, what was found, and what was removed, so that it is available for audit.
Best Practice: Establish and Document Periodic User Access Reviews for the Application
It is a best practice to both establish and document the solution for keeping access appropriate over time: review the Application’s user and privileged access at a risk-based frequency, with business and IT owners reviewing the access they understand, remove inappropriate access promptly, and retain the evidence.
Benefits: Regular access reviews shrink the window in which former employees, departed contractors, or over-privileged accounts can misuse an Application. Retained evidence also satisfies auditors and regulators with minimal effort, because it is produced as a normal part of operations.
Advance Maturity Deliberately: Crawl, Walk, Run
Crawl. Access lists are exported and reviewed manually at a fixed interval, and evidence is saved with the Application’s documentation.
Walk. Reviews follow a defined, risk-based schedule with assigned business and IT reviewers, tracked removal timelines, and findings recorded as Risks.
Run. Reviews are driven by an access governance capability that presents reviewers with current access, flags anomalies, removes revoked access automatically, and retains evidence centrally.
Connections to Related IF4IT Practices and Inventories
The Application Portfolio Management (APM) Best Practices addresses assessing application security and compliance risk across the portfolio.
How to cite this page
When referencing this page in academic work, internal standards, or external publications, include the page title, IF4IT as author and publisher (The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT), LLC), the URL, and your access date.
Example (informal web citation):
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT), LLC. Establish and Document Periodic User Access Reviews for the Application | Application Management Best Practices. https://if4it.org/best-practices/application-management-best-practices/establish-and-document-periodic-user-access-reviews-for-the-application/ (accessed 2026-10-30).
See About Us for content governance and site-wide citation guidance.
Copyright for The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT), LLC: 2008 - Present
Legal Disclaimers