User access reviews
User access reviews that produce real evidence
A user access review (UAR) is the periodic check where someone accountable looks at each person’s access to a system and confirms it’s still appropriate — or removes it. The review itself is straightforward. The hard part is the evidence: proving to an auditor that the list you reviewed reflects what access actually looked like at the time, and that the revocations you decided on were carried out. Useboards is built around that evidence problem.
Why the snapshot is the whole game
The most common audit finding on a UAR is that the evidence doesn’t match the review date. If your review is a live query against current state, any access that changes after the review makes your evidence inconsistent — the reviewer approved a picture that no longer exists. Useboards pins each user’s access the moment a review starts: the snapshot copies user, access level, group, and last-login into immutable review items. Later changes in the database can’t shift what the reviewer saw. The evidence reflects exactly the state at review-start, every time.
How a review runs
Start a review and pick the in-scope systems; Useboards generates the snapshot. The accountable reviewer — typically the system or business owner — works down the list and marks each access keep or revoke, with optional justification. Dormant access (no recent Useboards sign-in) is flagged as a signal, not a hard block. Keep and revoke counters update on the review header so you always know what’s outstanding, and revoke decisions become tracked deprovisioning actions rather than a note someone has to action later.
- Immutable per-line snapshot: user, access level, group, and last-login pinned at review-start.
- Keep / revoke decision per line by a named reviewer, with optional justification.
- Revokes flow into tracked deprovisioning, not a to-do someone forgets.
- Dormant-access flags surface accounts worth a closer look.
The evidence pack auditors want
When the review is done, export a CSV evidence pack: reviewer, decision, timestamp, and justification per line. It’s the artifact your auditor is actually asking for — attributable, time-stamped, and tied to a snapshot rather than reconstructed after the fact. Because the underlying access history lives in an append-only audit log, you can also show that the revocations you decided on were executed, which a spreadsheet can’t demonstrate on its own.
Cadence is a policy decision, not a mandate
No framework prescribes an exact review frequency. Quarterly is a common cadence for privileged and production access, while lower-risk systems are often reviewed less frequently — the right interval depends on your risk assessment and control design. What auditors test is whether the review actually operated on the cadence your own policy defines. Useboards helps you keep that promise with reminders when a review comes due, so the control runs on schedule instead of becoming a scramble.
Frequently asked questions
What is a user access review?
A user access review (UAR) is a periodic check in which an accountable owner reviews each person’s access to a system and decides whether to keep or revoke it. It’s a common control used to demonstrate that access stays appropriate over time.
Why do immutable snapshots matter?
Because audit evidence has to reflect the state you actually reviewed. If access changes after a live-query review, your evidence becomes inconsistent with the review date — a frequent finding. Useboards pins each user’s access at review-start so later changes can’t contaminate the record.
Who should perform the review?
The person accountable for the system — usually the system or business owner — since they can judge whether access is still appropriate. It should be someone other than the person whose access is under review, to preserve separation of duties.
How often should we run access reviews?
No framework mandates a specific frequency. Quarterly is a common cadence for privileged and production access; lower-risk systems are often reviewed less often, depending on your risk assessment. What matters is running the review consistently on the cadence your policy defines.
Related
Run an audit-ready access review
Snapshot-based evidence, tracked revocations, CSV export — set up in minutes.