Stop reconstructing how your controls work every audit cycle

Access reviews, evidence collection, change approvals, exception handling, and remediation live across tickets, documents, approvals, and a few people's memory. Sapeum captures how those control workflows actually run, structures them into a defensible baseline, and keeps an attributable, versioned history you can review and improve.

See how it works See it in action

Challenges

Challenges we solve

Control logic lives across tickets, documents, approvals, and unwritten habits

Capture how access reviews, evidence collection, change approvals, and remediation actually run today in one structured view of steps, owners, approvals, and exceptions.

Evidence collection is a recurring fire drill, and control narratives drift from how work really happens

Maintain versioned workflow documentation with attributable change and clear ownership, so your control baseline matches reality and is easier to defend.

Remediation and exceptions are tracked ad hoc, with unclear ownership and follow-through

Make exception paths and remediation steps explicit, with owners and checkpoints, so nothing falls through the gaps between systems and teams.

How it works

How risk and compliance teams use Sapeum

  1. 01

    Capture the current state

    Document how control operation, access reviews, evidence gathering, approvals, exceptions, and remediation actually happen today, including who does what and where decisions split.

  2. 02

    Structure for accountability

    Turn control knowledge into structured workflow data with steps, owners, approvers, controls, checkpoints, dependencies, and exception paths teams can review together.

  3. 03

    Compare, govern, and defend

    Maintain a versioned, attributable baseline, compare current and target control design side by side, and use it as a clearer foundation for reviews, audits, and control updates.

LIVE
User Access Management · 11:47
AB
DM
TS
User Access ManagementExported: June 17, 2026 at 11:09 PM[B] Raise request inidentity tool[N] Governance reporting and improvement[M] Continuous access monitoring[I] Remove old access fromprior role[E] Manager approvesrequest[C] Provision baselineaccess automatically[H] Privileged access handling[J] Revoke access acrossconnected systems[K] Access review and recertification[F] System or data ownerapproval[D] Request additionalaccess[G] Fulfill approved access[L] Emergency access / break glass[A] Access request intake[N.3] Remediate findings[N.4] Feed findings intopolicy and role design[N.2] Report metrics to riskcommittee[N.1] Report metrics tosecurity leadership[M.2] Generate accessanomaly alerts[M.1] Feed access andauthentication events toSIEM[H.1] Place account in PAMvault[H.2] Check out privilegedaccess when needed[K.2] Recertify access[K.3] Remove flaggedaccess[K.1] Generate accesslisting[G.2] Grant access directly[G.1] Target systemintegrated?[G.3] Route task to IT formanual provisioning[L.2] Review emergencyaccess use[L.1] Use break glassaccount[A.3] HR processestermination[A.2] Employee rolechange[A.1] New joiner hired[A.4] Emergency elevatedaccess neededAfter useFlagged forremovalIf role changeIntegratedPrivileged/ad…accessNon-privilegedaccessRoutine accessSensitive/dataaccessIf beyondbaselineWhen neededNot integratedDescriptionWhen someone is hired orchanges roles, a requestgets raised in the identitytool. The request is tied toa defined role.Access is built aroundroles, so people get therole's standardentitlements rather than apile of one-off grants,which helps keep accessclose to least privilege.Baseline access for thatrole is provisionedautomatically off the role.The client described thisbaseline as includingemail, network access, andstandard apps.The client stated thataccess should not beprovisioned from an emailor a hallway conversation.If the request is not in thetool with an approval, itshould not exist.The identity-tool controlsincludesegregation-of-duties rulesthat flag toxiccombinations. Theexample given wassomeone who can bothcreate a vendor andapprove a payment.If the request would createan SoD conflict, it getsblocked unless there is adocumented mitigatingcontrol and a sign-off.Systemsidentity toolDescriptionThis area covers how process performance and findings are reported and acted on.DescriptionBeyond point-in-time reviews, there is continuous monitoring of how access is actuallyused.SystemsSIEMDescriptionOn a role change, after thenew access is granted, theold access from the priorrole is supposed to beremoved.The client said theycurrently rely on accessreviews to catch caseswhere prior-role accesswas not removed.ProblemsThis removal step is oftenweaker in practice and iswhere access creephappens, because addingaccess has an eagerrequester behind it, andremoving it does not.The client gave theexample of someonemoving from finance tooperations, where nobodyis incentivized to claw backthe old finance access.The client furtheremphasized that thisdeprovisioning side iswhere the real risk livesand where breaches andaudit findings often comefrom.A lot of the deprovisioningtracking is still manual,which increases thechance that access thatshould have been removedstays in place.OpportunitiesBetter tooling fordeprovisioning trackingwould reduce risk.DescriptionThe manager approvesroutine access requests.Approval evidence isretained in the IdentityTool ticket, including theapprover, timestamp, andwhy the access wasrequested.ExecutorsmanagerSystemsidentity toolDescriptionThe baseline thingseveryone in that role needsare provisionedautomatically off the role.Examples mentioned wereemail, network access, andstandard apps.Every grant should traceback to an approvedrequest in the identity tool.DescriptionOnce the termination feedis received, revocationkicks off across theconnected systems.For a normal departure,this happens the same day.For an involuntarytermination, access is cutimmediately, with securityinvolved at the moment sothere is no window.The client said orphanedaccounts are one of thethings they specificallyhunt for.ExecutorsSecurityProblemsContractor and third-partyoffboarding can be harderto execute cleanly becausetheir end dates are notalways maintained ascleanly in the HR system asemployee departures.If HR is late or missessomeone, the risk is anorphaned account —access that is still live forsomeone who has gone.The client stressed thatremoving access whensomeone leaves is one ofthe areas where the realrisk lives, and wherebreaches and auditfindings come from whenthis control is weak.A lot of the deprovisioningtracking is still manualtoday, which increases therisk of lingering access.OpportunitiesBetter tooling fordeprovisioning trackingwould genuinely reducerisk.DescriptionThis is the backstop control for existing access.On a set cycle, access is reviewed and recertified.For privileged accounts, reviews happen more often because the stakes are higher.To counter rubber-stamp behavior, they track removal rates. A reviewer who never removes anyone is itself treated as a flag.Completed reviews are retained as evidence, including who performed the review, when they reviewed it, and what they changed.The client said this is one of the areas they work hardest to keep honest.Executorsmanagersystem ownerProblemsThe honest weak point of any access review is rubber-stamp risk: the review is only as good as the person doing it.This is something they manage rather than something they consider fully solved.The client emphasized that the periodic review needs to be genuinely meaningful rather than a rubber stamp, and that weak reviews are acommon source of breaches and audit findings.A lot of the review tracking is still pretty manual, which makes it harder to keep the process honest.OpportunitiesBetter tooling for review tracking would genuinely reduce risk.FrequencyQuarterly for sensitive systems; at least annually for the rest. Privileged accounts are reviewed more often.DescriptionFor privileged or sensitiveaccess, a second set ofeyes is required in additionto the manager: thesystem owner or dataowner must also approve.Approval evidence isretained in the IdentityTool ticket, including theapprover, timestamp, andwhy the access wasrequested.Privileged/admin access isthen handled separatelyfrom standard fulfillment.Executorssystem ownerdata ownerSystemsidentity toolDescriptionAnything beyond thebaseline is requestedspecifically. The requestcan be made by the personor their manager.ExecutorspersonmanagerDescriptionThe client has break glass accounts for genuine emergencies.The control is not meant to prevent emergency access. It is meant to make emergency userare, visible, and accounted for afterward.DescriptionFindings driveremediation.Findings may come fromaudits or from theorganization's ownreviews.DescriptionFindings feed back intopolicy and role design aspart of continuousimprovement.DescriptionMetrics are also reportedup to the risk committee.Reported metrics include:orphaned accountsstale accessrevocation SLAperformancereview completion ratesDescriptionMetrics are reported up tosecurity leadership.Reported metrics include:orphaned accountsstale accessrevocation SLAperformancereview completion ratesDescriptionAnomalies such asimpossible travel or a burstof failed logins generatealerts.SystemsSIEMDescriptionAccess and authenticationevents feed the SIEM andare captured there formonitoring and testing.SystemsSIEMDescriptionPrivileged accounts arehandled separately byputting them into aprivileged accessmanagement vault ratherthan leaving admins withstanding elevated rights.Systemsprivileged access managementvaultDescriptionAn admin checksprivileged access out whenneeded, often withapproval, and the sessionis recorded. This makesprivileged use deliberateand leaves a trail.ExecutorsadminSystemsprivileged access managementvaultDescriptionManagers and systemowners recertify the accesslisting.They must make a realdisposition on each linerather than bulk-approvingthe whole list.They confirm each personstill needs their access andflag anything that shouldbe removed.The completed review iskept as evidence, includingwho reviewed it, when,and what they changed.Executorsmanagersystem ownerDescriptionAny access flagged duringrecertification is thenactioned for removal.DescriptionGenerate the list of whohas access to what forreview.DescriptionWhere there areautomated connectorsbetween the identity tooland the target system, theprocess is hands-off. Theapproval flows throughand the access is granteddirectly.Systemsidentity tooltarget systemDescriptionAfter approval, the fulfillment pathdepends on whether there is anautomated connector between theidentity tool and the target system.Systemsidentity toolDescriptionFor systems that have notbeen integrated yet, therequest routes a task to ITto grant access manually.In this manual path, theaccount gets set up withsign-on and multi-factorenrollment.ExecutorsITProblemsManual provisioning hasmore risk because there isa human in the loop whocould fat-finger it or do itslightly differently thanrequested.Systemsidentity toolDescriptionEvery break glass use isreviewed after the fact toconfirm it was legitimateand accounted forafterward.DescriptionBreak glass accounts areused when elevated accessis needed immediately andthe normal request path istoo slow.These accounts aretime-boxed, and every useis logged.DescriptionA termination is triggeredfrom HR. When HRprocesses the termination,it feeds the client's systemto start access revocation.For a normal departure,this occurs the same day.For an involuntarytermination, the action isimmediate and security islooped in so there is noaccess window.Contractors and thirdparties follow the samegeneral approach, buttheir end dates are notalways tracked as cleanlyin the HR system asemployee terminations.ExecutorsHRSecurityProblemsContractors and thirdparties are harder tooffboard cleanly becausetheir end dates are notalways as clean in the HRsystem as an employee's.Because this controldepends on HR triggeringthe event, a late or missedHR action can leave anorphaned account withstill-live access forsomeone who is gone.DescriptionA role change can alsotrigger the access process.For a mover, the newaccess gets granted, andthe old access is supposedto be removed.DescriptionA new hire can trigger theaccess process.DescriptionThis trigger applies whensomeone needs elevatedaccess right away and thenormal request path is tooslow.
DM
SME: "…unless it's flagged, then it goes through the exception path first."

Resources

See it in action

Browse all resources

Pattern

Before and after Sapeum

Before

  • ✗ Control and compliance workflows are fragmented across tickets, documents, approvals, and team memory
  • ✗ Audit prep means reconstructing process logic, ownership, and evidence trails from multiple systems
  • ✗ Control narratives and the way work actually happens drift apart over time

After

  • ✓ The real control workflow is visible end to end, including approvals, checkpoints, and exception paths
  • ✓ Owners, approvals, and controlled changes are easy to review and maintain with attributable history
  • ✓ Process documentation becomes a defensible baseline for audit readiness and control redesign, not a stale artifact

FAQ

Frequently asked

Which risk and compliance workflows fit Sapeum best?

Access reviews and certifications, evidence collection, control operation, change approvals, exception handling, remediation, and audit support, especially workflows that cross teams, systems, and controls.

How does Sapeum support audit readiness?

It maintains structured, versioned workflow documentation with visible ownership, decision points, checkpoints, exception paths, and attributable change history that is easier to review and defend.

Can Sapeum help improve controls, not just document them?

Yes. Capture the current state, design a target control design from the same baseline, compare them side by side, and review workflow-aware suggestions tied to the actual process.

Keep exploring

Related solutions

View all solutions

By industry

Energy

In energy, the hard part usually isn’t knowing that a process should change. It’s getting a trustworthy view of how w…

By industry

Financial Services

Financial processes often break down at approvals, handoffs, exception paths, and cross-functional reviews. Sapeum he…

By industry

Government & Public Sector

Capture real workflows across policy, service delivery, compliance, and cross-agency coordination so teams can create…

Built to SOC 2 standards

Sapeum is designed with enterprise-grade security practices from the ground up: encryption at rest and in transit, role-based access controls, and auditable change history.

Learn more

Ready to make your controls defensible by design?

See how Sapeum helps risk and compliance teams capture how control work really happens, maintain attributable, versioned baselines, and improve controls with clearer accountability.

Talk to sales