# Article Name Why Access Reviews Matter for SOC 2 Compliance # Article Summary Access reviews prove SOC 2 compliance by validating least privilege, reducing risk, enabling automation and audit-ready evidence # Original HTML URL on Toriihq.com https://www.toriihq.com/articles/soc2-access-reviews # Details Access reviews are the practical checks that prove who has access to your systems. They show who can get in and what they can do, which matters to security teams and auditors when access decisions are questioned. They tie entitlements and roles to SOC 2 control objectives like logical access and least privilege. They also show segregation of duties and create a clear line between daily operations and auditor expectations. You’ll see how attestation logs, reviewer comments, and remediation items become usable audit artifacts. Skipping or delaying reviews invites privilege creep, orphaned accounts, unnoticed third-party access, and a bigger blast radius after a breach. We’ll break down what auditors expect for coverage and cadence, show how targeted sampling keeps reviewers focused, and explain why including service accounts, API keys, and cloud IAM roles is essential to complete coverage. An audit-ready access review program proves least privilege and cuts exposure when breaches happen. With clear ownership, risk-based cadences, comprehensive scope, and automation that records immutable attestations, you get repeatable, defensible SOC 2 evidence. ## How do access reviews support SOC 2 controls? Access reviews give auditors measurable proof that access matches stated controls and policies. They connect daily operations, who can log in, what roles are assigned, and who approves changes to SOC 2 control objectives like logical access control, least privilege, and segregation of duties. That empirical link is what turns policy into testable evidence during an audit. Auditors expect recorded evidence showing entitlement decisions and remediation steps over time. Useful artifacts include: attestation logs, reviewer notes, remediation tracking, and provisioning histories, which give auditors the timeline and context they need to validate controls. - Attestation logs with timestamps showing who reviewed what and when, and how the decision aligned with role definitions and access rules. - Reviewer comments explaining the business or technical reasons why access was allowed or revoked, including risk assessment where applicable. - Remediation items tied to identified action owners with planned and actual completion dates, plus evidence that remediation fixed the root cause. - Provisioning and deprovisioning records that map to role definitions and approvals, showing who authorized changes and when they took effect. These items demonstrate operational control over access, not just written policy. Access reviews should cover more than interactive users to be complete. Service accounts, API keys, cloud IAM roles, and third-party contractor access all need the same attestation treatment auditors expect for human users. The 2022 incident involving Okta [https://www.okta.com] and a third-party support vendor showed how external access paths can become audit focal points, and that visibility is what reviewers need to show. IBM’s 2023 Cost of a Data Breach Report shows that breaches often cost organizations millions. As a result, auditors scrutinize whether controls cover non-interactive and vendor entitlements across systems and vendors. When reviewers attest regularly and record their rationale, auditors get traceable evidence. A chain of dated attestations, reviewer comments, and documented remediation creates a clear trace that ties back to control criteria during testing, making it easier to show compliance with CC6/CC7-like expectations. Present these artifacts grouped by system and control objective, and auditors can see not just who had access, but how the organization enforces least privilege and segregation of duties. ## What risks come from skipped or delayed access reviews? Skipping scheduled access reviews creates blind spots that magnify risk across security, operations, and compliance today. When reviews are delayed, privilege creep and orphaned accounts pile up faster than teams can track. Recent incidents make the risk obvious: in 2019 a Capital One misconfigured cloud permissions and an attacker accessed S3 data, and a 2022 Okta support issue showed how third-party access can expose customer data when controls and attestations were unclear. These events prompt auditors to ask for expanded sampling, deeper evidence, and proof of timely remediation. The operational and compliance consequences are measurable, and they often trigger extra audit work and findings: - Excessive privileges raise the likelihood of control exceptions and often prompt auditors to flag segregation-of-duty failures that require remediation. - Orphaned or dormant accounts often cause control failures and force expanded testing across multiple systems and environments. - Unreviewed third-party access can trigger customer-impact exceptions and force auditors to request contractual evidence and proof of oversight. - Delayed remediation typically draws auditor scrutiny and can result in formal remediation plans and follow-up audits. Auditors also focus on downstream costs to judge whether controls are working, and those numbers matter in boardroom conversations. Investigations can stretch for months, with containment and remediation work pulling resources from operations and customer communications, and longer windows drive higher legal, forensic, and notification costs. Fast, documented access reviews reduce the chance of those outcomes and shorten remediation timelines, which auditors will view as stronger evidence of effective operational control. ## How often should access reviews run and what to include? Access reviews need clear cadence and scope to satisfy auditors and reduce surprises. Auditors generally expect tighter cycles for high-risk identities and a set schedule for general users, so spell out who gets reviewed and when. Publish a calendar, assign owners, and make completion targets visible to teams so missed cycles are easy to spot. Privileged accounts need more frequent checks because misuse causes greater harm. Aim for monthly or continuous checks for admins, database superusers, and cloud root-like roles, while general employees should be reviewed at least quarterly; many organizations tag contractors and third parties for the same cadence as privileged users when they have improved access. Immediate, ad-hoc reviews should trigger on role changes, mergers, or new system onboardings to capture transient risk. Include every identity type in scope so auditors see that reviews are complete. That means listing interactive users, service accounts, groups, cloud roles, contractors, and any admin-level access so nothing slips through the cracks during inspection. - Interactive user accounts used by employees, contractors, and temporary staff across all business applications and productivity tools. - Groups and role assignments that grant access to multiple resources or inherit permissions through nested memberships. - Service accounts and API keys used by applications, scripts, and automation, including keys stored in secrets managers. - Cloud IAM roles such as those in AWS IAM [https://aws.amazon.com/iam] and similar provider roles across multi-cloud environments, reviewed for privilege scope. - Third-party contractor and vendor access including temporary credentials, portal accounts, and any direct connections to production systems. - Privileged access to databases, network devices, and admin consoles, especially accounts with change or escalation privileges. Design complete attestations for systems that handle sensitive data or run critical operations, and use targeted sampling for lower-risk apps. Apply lower sampling rates to low-risk applications while ensuring core production systems receive full attestations each cycle. Make sampling risk-aware and repeatable, and document the logic so auditors understand why specific accounts were chosen. Document the reviewers, sign-offs, and exception handling so auditors see who took responsibility and why. Keep a roster that shows who reviewed what and when, store reviewer comments and remediation tickets, and record temporary access approvals with expiration dates to show compensating controls were applied. To limit fatigue, rotate reviewers by role and use role-based sampling so reviewers only see accounts relevant to their business context. Set measurable targets and timelines so reviewers and auditors can track performance easily. Track completion rate, median time-to-remediate, and exception counts by risk tier, and publish a short audit-ready summary each cycle that maps scope to evidence locations. This speeds up audits and proves the process is repeatable. ## How can automation improve access reviews? Automation turns tedious entitlement lists into an accurate, queryable inventory in minutes. Connectors pull current state from SSO, cloud IAM, and HR systems so reviews start with actual data instead of guesses. That baseline makes it practical to assign reviewers, schedule attestations, and track remediation without the usual email chaos. Practical automation patterns map cleanly to auditor needs and deliver measurable operational gains across review processes. Useful building blocks include: - Connectors to SSO, IAM, and cloud platforms that keep entitlement inventories up to date - Entitlement normalization into a common model so different systems mean the same thing - Automated reviewer assignment and in-workflow attestation with approve or revoke actions - One-click remediation actions tied to APIs for fast deprovisioning - Automatic evidence capture with immutable timestamps, reviewer comments, and remediation records The measurable gains are meaningful to auditors and IT leaders focused on access governance. Automated workflows often cut reviewer time and shrink the window for stale entitlements, lowering risk faster than periodic-only checks. Analytics-based alerts spot privilege creep, unusual access spikes, and repeated temporary grants so teams can act before auditors find exceptions. Platforms like Okta [https://www.okta.com] and AWS [https://aws.amazon.com] expose APIs and SCIM that make these patterns practical. Many organizations see median time-to-remediate drop from days to hours after automation. Integration choices determine whether automation scales or creates blind spots for teams. Prefer SCIM for provisioning, use API-based reconciliation for contrast checks, and correlate entitlement changes with authentication logs to spot suspicious behavior early. Still, avoid over-automation without human validation; an automated revoke can break a business process if exceptions aren't surfaced and approved. Design workflows that require reviewer confirmation for high-risk changes and keep clear fallback procedures so automation speeds reviews without sacrificing control. ## How do you build an audit-ready access review program? Build the program with clear owners, repeatable steps, and evidence you can hand to an auditor immediately. Assign one program owner to manage the schedule and name reviewers for each system so responsibility is clear; that helps avoid unexpected gaps and blame during an audit. Document procedures that show who runs each review, how exceptions are approved, and the escalation path when reviewers don’t respond, and keep that documentation versioned so auditors see a repeatable process. Make cadences risk-based: privileged identities on a monthly cycle, broad user populations at least quarterly, and on-demand reviews after mergers or major role changes. Define measurable KPIs that auditors expect and track them consistently every cycle. - Review completion rate by population and by risk tier each review cycle and by reviewer group - Median time to remediate documented exceptions, measured from detection to closure - Number of open exceptions broken out by severity tier and by age buckets - Percentage of attestations that include reviewer comments or documented remediation notes Log these metrics alongside attestation artifacts so you can show trends and prove the program is improving over time. Handle exceptions by documenting clear compensating controls and temporary approvals with specific owners and deadlines. When access must remain while a fix is scheduled, record a temporary approval, the compensating control (for example, heightened monitoring or restricted network access), and a firm remediation deadline; auditors will want dates, owners, and evidence of follow-through. The Capital One breach showed how unchecked cloud access can snowball, and IBM’s reporting finds average breach costs often run into the millions, which auditors use when judging control effectiveness. Prepare audit artifacts so they are usable and easy to navigate, not just complete. Create an executive summary that maps results to control criteria, attach drill-down evidence (attestation logs, reviewer comments, remediation tickets), and produce a traceability matrix that links each artifact to the specific SOC 2 control objective. Run dry-runs before the audit, give auditors read-only log access where appropriate, and prioritize cleaning up high-risk exceptions first so your program looks defensible and repeatable. ## Conclusion Access reviews are the proof auditors want for SOC 2 controls. They demonstrate who has access, confirm least privilege practices, and create a trail reviewers can follow to validate controls. Keep a program that schedules reviews by risk tier and covers users, roles, service accounts, and third parties. Capture evidence through automation, record attestations and exceptions, and link remediation tasks to specific owners so auditors can see least privilege in action. That approach reduces audit time and simplifies evidence review for auditors. ## Audit your company's SaaS usage today If you're interested in learning more about SaaS Management, let us know. Torii's SaaS Management Platform can help you: - Find hidden apps: Use AI to scan your entire company for unauthorized apps. Happens in real-time and is constantly running in the background. - Cut costs: Save money by removing unused licenses and duplicate tools. - Implement IT automation: Automate your IT tasks to save time and reduce errors - like offboarding and onboarding automation. - Get contract renewal alerts: Ensure you don't miss important contract renewals. Torii is the industry's first all-in-one SaaS Management Platform, providing a single source of truth across Finance, IT, and Security. Learn more by visiting Torii [https://www.toriihq.com].