Cocrico - User Access Review and Certification Platform for a Securities Exchange

Dashboard, My reviews, the review workspace, campaigns and revocations. Each of the reviewer's 3 open campaigns, privileged, manager and a delegated depository review, opens its own workspace.

Leaver still active, mover mismatch, no HR record, dormant, peer outlier, SoD conflict and privileged. Flagged items sort first, then by risk from critical to low, each with a one-line reason.

Revoke decided, ticket raised, ticket closed and verified gone. A removal counts only when a later sync no longer finds it, and the demo shows 3 failures: still present, re-granted and could not confirm.

Review items across 3 campaigns, 33 identities including service, break-glass and unmatched accounts, 11 applications, 23 catalogued entitlements, 16 campaigns and 24 revocations.

Reviews That Were Rubber-Stamped

Reviewers received whole workbooks with no sign of which rows were risky: a leaver whose account was still enabled looked the same as a daily user. Ticking keep on the whole sheet was the fastest way through.

Removals Nobody Checked

A revoke was an email to the service desk. Nobody confirmed the access had gone, birthright roles could quietly grant it back, and some systems only report users through a file export.

Evidence an Auditor Can Test

The auditors test against familiar IT general control concepts: a complete and accurate population, reviewers independent of the access they review, timely removal and proof that removal happened. The spreadsheets could not show the list reviewed was the complete list.

Conflicts and Independence

No one may both create and approve a depository transfer, or create a vendor and release its payment. Nobody certifies their own access, delegation cannot send an item back to its subject, and the CPMI-IOSCO cyber guidance expects strong control of privileged accounts and of staff who leave or move.