Biometric Security For Offices

📢 𝗠𝗶𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗼𝗳𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮 is extending 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆‑𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰 𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 access controls directly to the core of 𝗼𝗻‑𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 infrastructure: 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗗𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗗𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗿𝘀. 🆔 🔒 The new 𝗠𝗶𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝗼𝗳𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗗𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗿𝘀 is now in 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄, enabling organizations to apply 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 and 𝗺𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶‑𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (𝗠𝗙𝗔) to internal resources authenticating via 𝗞𝗲𝗿𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗼𝘀. 🛡️ 🛠️ By deploying a lightweight 𝗣𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗼𝗿 on domain controllers, organizations can intercept 𝗞𝗲𝗿𝗯𝗲𝗿𝗼𝘀 authentication and enforce 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗻 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀 — even for protocols that don’t natively support them — eliminating 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 inside the network perimeter. 🛡️ 🏢 This ensures consistent protection across 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲, 𝗼𝗻‑𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀, and 𝗵𝘆𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱 environments, while keeping 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰 local for performance and sending 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰 to Entra for 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆 𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 📡 🧩 This capability also unlocks 𝗜𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗧𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁 𝗗𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲 (𝗜𝗧𝗗𝗥) for hybrid users, verifying every 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁, blocking 𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, and enforcing 𝗠𝗙𝗔 at the domain controller layer for sensitive on‑premises 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. 🕵️♂️ 📊 Admins can define 𝗦𝗣𝗡‑𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀 — for example, requiring MFA for `cifs/*` file shares, enabling compliant device access to `MSSQL/*` servers, or applying step‑up authentication for critical 𝗥𝗗𝗣 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀. 📂 ✅ Built‑in flexibility supports phased rollouts with 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲, 𝗦𝗣𝗡 𝗘𝘅𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗨𝗻𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗕𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴, and 𝗕𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗚𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲 for emergencies — ensuring 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 without disrupting 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. 🧯 📌 This approach delivers 𝗼𝗻‑𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗠𝗙𝗔 𝗲𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 without third‑party 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 or complex 𝗻𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀, modernizing 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 for 𝗵𝘆𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 while integrating seamlessly with existing 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗿𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲. 🔗 👉 Discover how to start testing today: https://lnkd.in/ea3hMGgH 🔗 Microsoft Security #Cybersecurity #ZeroTrust #MicrosoftEntra #IdentitySecurity #ConditionalAccess #MFA #ITDR #NetworkSecurity #AccessControl #Kerberos #ActiveDirectory #ZTNA #SecurityServiceEdge #IdentityProtection | Ashish Jain, Yann Duchenne, Franck Heilmann

User Access Review: UAR is a critical detective control in ITGC ensuring authorized access to systems and data. 1. Vulnerabilities in UARs Lack of Timeliness: Delays in reviews lead to unresolved unauthorized access. Ineffective Scope: Missed systems, roles, or user populations. Inadequate Mechanisms: Failure to detect orphan accounts or excessive privileges. Manual Errors & Poor Documentation: Risk of overlooked issues and insufficient audit trails. 2. Risks Associated with UARs Unauthorized Access: Data breaches or fraud risks from improper access. Data Integrity Risks: Potential malicious or inadvertent modification of critical data. Regulatory Non-Compliance: Non-adherence to compliance requirements such as SOX or GDPR. Operational & Financial Risks: Increased potential for fraud, financial loss, or business disruption. 3. Compensating Controls When UAR is ineffective or absent, compensating controls help mitigate risks: Real-Time Monitoring & Automated Access Controls Multi-Factor Authentication Periodic Access Re-Certifications Logging and Automated User Provisioning 4. UAR as a Compensating Control UAR can act as a compensating control for deficiencies in: Role-Based Access Controls (RBAC): Detect and correct misaligned access. User De-Provisioning: Identify orphan accounts for timely removal. Segregation of Duties (SoD): Detect conflicting roles during access reviews. Logging & Monitoring: Detect unauthorized access missed by logs. Privilege Escalation & MFA Absence: Identify unauthorized access and mitigate risks. 5. Key Considerations for Auditors Auditors must ensure that the UAR process is comprehensive and effective by focusing on key attributes: Reviewer Independence: The reviewer should not review their own access. Reviewer should be authorized and have appropriate knowledge of access policies and system functionality. Timeliness of Review: Reviews should be conducted on time as per the defined schedule (e.g., quarterly or annually). Senior Oversight: Reviewer’s access should be reviewed by a senior or control authority to ensure accountability and prevent conflicts of interest. Actionable Follow-Ups: Issues identified during the review must be addressed promptly. Documentation and Approval: All reviews should be properly documented, with evidence of approval and follow-up actions. 6. Important Attributes to Review User Roles & Privileges: Ensure access follows the principle of least privilege, and users only have access necessary for their role. Orphan Accounts & Excessive Privileges: Detect accounts no longer in use or access rights exceeding the user's job requirements. Segregation of Duties: Ensure there are no conflicting responsibilities that could lead to errors or fraud. 7. Segregation of Duties (SoD) Conflicts Key SoD conflicts to be aware of during access reviews: Admin vs. Security Roles Development vs. Production Access Finance Roles & Approvals Audit vs. Operational Roles

Near-Field Magnetic Induction (NFMI) – A Future Path for Next-Generation Access Control In the security industry, we constantly evaluate new technologies—Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and RFID have all shaped how we exchange data. But there’s another, quieter technology that may be a future game-changer for secure credentials: Near-Field Magnetic Induction (NFMI). What is NFMI? NFMI uses low-frequency magnetic fields—not traditional broadcast radio waves—to transmit data between devices. Its range is intentionally short (centimeters to a couple of meters), creating a “magnetic bubble” where communication occurs only when devices are physically close. Why This Could Shape the Future of Access Control: Harder to Skim or Relay – Traditional RFID and Bluetooth credentials can be intercepted or relayed from a distance. NFMI’s tiny communication bubble makes this extremely difficult. Selective Activation – Readers only engage when detecting a credential’s magnetic field signature, reducing signal leakage risks. Reliable in Harsh Environments – Performs well in metal-heavy door frames, turnstiles, and RF-interference zones. Power Efficient – Ideal for battery-powered or embedded readers in discreet locations. How NFMI Could Work in an Access Control System Credential Device – The user carries an NFMI-enabled fob, smart badge, or wearable. Proximity Trigger – Within a few centimeters, the credential and reader create a secure magnetic link—no open-air RF broadcast. Encrypted Data Transfer – Data is exchanged via magnetic coupling directly to the reader’s coil antenna. Verification – The access control panel checks the credentials against its database and grants or denies entry. Layered Security – Can integrate with PINs, biometrics, or mobile app confirmations. High-Security Potential Government / DoD Facilities – Reduced TEMPEST concerns and RF leakage. Critical Infrastructure – Works where other wireless tech struggles. Healthcare – Secure staff and patient data without long-range wireless emissions. Corporate HQs – Mitigates drive-by credential harvesting. Why It’s Worth Watching NFMI isn’t widely deployed in physical access control—yet. But its unique combination of short-range communication, low detectability, and interference resistance makes it a strong candidate for future security deployments, especially in high-risk or RF-sensitive environments. As security threats evolve, NFMI could become a cornerstone technology for protecting credentials and communications. Do you see NFMI as the next leap in secure access? #SecurityTechnology #NFMI #WirelessSecurity #AccessControl #PhysicalSecurity #SecureComms #SecurityDesign #FutureTech

Authorization is a where we control the access, deciding what a person can or cannot do. Below are the various kinds of authorization : 𝟭. 𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗥𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Assigns permissions to roles, and users are assigned to these roles. Use Cases: Enterprise systems, where job functions determine access. Example: A “Manager” role has access to financial reports, and employees in that role inherit those permissions. 𝟮. 𝗔𝘁𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗲-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗔𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Access is granted based on attributes of the user, resource, environment, or action. Attributes: User’s department, resource sensitivity, time of access, etc. Example: A user can only access documents tagged with “Confidential” if their “clearance level” is “High.” 𝟯. 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗗𝗔𝗖) Definition: The resource owner decides who can access their resources. Example: A file owner can grant read/write access to specific users. 𝟰. 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗠𝗔𝗖) Definition: Access is determined by a central authority based on classification levels. Example: A “Top Secret” document can only be accessed by individuals with “Top Secret” clearance. 𝟱. 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗣𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Decisions are made based on policies defined by administrators. Example: Access is allowed if the user’s location is “USA” and their subscription level is “Premium.” 𝟲. 𝗜𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘆-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗜𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Access is granted directly to an individual identity rather than roles or attributes. Example: Granting a specific user access to a single resource. 𝟳. 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗲-𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 Definition: Granular access decisions based on detailed criteria, often a combination of ABAC and PBAC. Example: A user can only edit specific sections of a document during work hours. 𝟴. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗲𝘅𝘁-𝗔𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 Definition: Considers context, such as device, location, or behavior patterns, to decide access. Example: Allow access only if the user is on a trusted device within a specific location. 𝟵. 𝗭𝗲𝗿𝗼 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 Definition: “Never trust, always verify.” Access is continuously evaluated, even after initial authentication. Example: A user is required to re-authenticate when accessing a sensitive resource, even within a trusted session. 𝟭𝟬. 𝗨𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗨𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Access is based on resource usage patterns and quotas. Example: A user can upload files up to a 10GB limit per month. 𝟭𝟭. 𝗧𝗮𝘀𝗸-𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (𝗧𝗕𝗔𝗖) Definition: Access is granted based on tasks the user needs to perform. Example: A user can approve a document only if they are part of the approval task chain.

🚨 Breaking: Silverstein Properties rolls out digital keys in Apple Wallet for their residential properties, but the two most interesting aspects are the player collaboration and the broader implementation this brings (IMO.) This signals a shift in how companies will work together, with our industry moving toward "seamless access control"—not just within a specific building but across Silverstein's offices, commercial spaces, and other properties. First, the players involved: SwiftConnect is the Credential Manager Allegion US is the Credential Provider Allegion is also the Locks Kastle Systems is the Physical Access Control System (PACS), readers, and integrator Apple brings their Wallet and phones/watches Like I did, you might wonder why they didn't just work with Kastle and Allegion alone. After all, Apple works with Allegion, and Allegion works with Kastle. In the past, that would have been enough for a single building with specific partners. The answer lies in addressing our industry fragmentation (even in a city / especially in a city like NY), improving operational efficiency, generating revenue, building a network, and enhancing the user experience - all the discussions we have within The Access Control Executive Brief (the going beyond locking, unlocking, and keeping bad people out. Value beyond putting a card in the phone and high fiving yourself for incrementally doing what we have been doing). Based on Silverstein's history and their previous press releases about Apple Wallet integration with SwiftConnect in their office spaces (from February 2022 - 7 World Trade Center office building), their strategy is to create a seamless network across their portfolio while providing an excellent user experience for tenants. For instance, per the 2022 press release, at 7 World Trade Center - an office building, they are using HID readers and HID Origo as the credential provider (and other PACs and probably locks, too), and now they can offer both residential and office tenants access to amenities and flex spaces across all their buildings. This setup allows them to combine hardware providers, credentials, and physical access control systems throughout their portfolio. They use middleware (an identity platform?) to connect everything—allowing simple tap-and-go access with a phone's NFC. Super interesting. And btw - I think news like this is good for #biometrics too. It’s great to see Kastle and Allegion collaborating with SwiftConnect. Even more importantly, Silverstein's embrace of these changes and technologies sets a clear statement on the experience tenants can expect that will encourage other companies to follow suit. Don’t believe me? Just look at how effectively ButterflyMX has leveraged the network effect in New York real estate. [press release in the comments] #accesscontrol #globalcommunity #security #securityindustry

Access Control System – More Than Just a Door Lock Most people think access control is just a card reader on the wall… But in reality, it’s a complete system working behind every secured door. 🚪 What Actually Happens? Card / Biometric → Panel verifies → ✔ Door unlocks (EM Lock releases) ✔ Event logged in server 👉 Simple outside… complex inside. 🔌 What’s Behind the Door? • Reader (RFID / Biometric / Face) • EM Lock • Exit Push Button (RTE) • Break Glass Unit (BGU) • Door Sensor • Access Control Panel (ACP) • Server connectivity (RS-485 / TCP-IP) ⚙️ Why Systems Fail on Site From real experience 👇 • Door alignment issues → lock failure • Cable joints by labour → signal loss • Wrong cable length → voltage drop • Improper routing → damage in moving doors • Power fluctuation → controller faults 📊 Engineering Matters • Proper cable selection (FRLS, shielding) • Length & voltage drop calculation • Amplifier / power sizing • Clean termination & testing 🔗 Integration • Fire Alarm → Doors unlock in emergency • CCTV → Event-based recording • BMS → Central monitoring 🔥 Key Insight 👉 Access control is not about hardware… It’s about execution, wiring, and integration 💬 #Let’s #Discuss What’s the most common issue you’ve faced in access control doors on site? #AccessControl #SecuritySystems #ELV #Engineering #FacilityManagement #SmartBuildings #SiteExecution #SecurityEngineering

They fired 40 people in the last 5 years. NONE of them had their system access removed. Here's the full story: I spoke to a COO of a retail firm this year who had completed an internal audit. They'd just found 40 active user accounts tied to ex-employees. With only a couple hundred employees, that meant 20% of their user accounts belonged to people who already left. Hearing that as a security leader was terrifying. Theoretically, dozens of ex-employees could still log into the system and do whatever they wanted – and the company had no idea. If HR aren't informing IT about who’s left, it raises even bigger concerns: • Payroll didn’t know either (meaning ex-employees might still be getting paid) • Expense systems weren’t updated (potential for fraud) • Other access systems were outdated (huge internal risk) It all comes back to a simple process that every business thinks they're doing properly, but often aren't: Joiners, Movers, and Leavers. Here’s how it’s supposed to work: → When people join, give them the access they require. → When they change roles, remove and grant as needed. → When they leave, immediately strip all access. Sounds simple, right? In practice, most companies completely mess this up. And Movers pose the biggest risk: they keep collecting access privileges over the years like a digital hoarder. I've seen 10-year veterans with access to systems they haven’t touched in nearly a decade. Companies are great at granting more access… but terrible at removing what's no longer needed. If that statement resonates, here’s how to start tightening things up: 1. Only grant access after an employee actually shows up for Day 1. 2. Review and prune permissions every time someone changes roles. 3. Revoke all access the second someone exits (especially for high-risk dismissals). 4. Conduct regular spot checks for employee access. Access = risk. The more access someone has, the greater the damage they can create (accidentally or maliciously). So, review this access every time someone joins, changes roles, or leaves. Your organisation’s security — and reputation — depends on it. — How does your company handle offboarding today? Would love to hear if you've spotted any gaps in the process.

Dear IT Auditors, How to Test User Access Reviews Effectively User access controls protect systems from misuse and data exposure. But the real test of maturity lies in how organizations review and certify access over time. Many fail this test because reviews are treated as routine checkboxes instead of control activities that prevent risk. 📌 Start with Policy and Frequency Confirm there’s a documented policy defining who reviews access, how often, and for which systems. If frequency or scope isn’t defined, reviews lose meaning. 📌 Assess the Review Process Understand how reviews are triggered, performed, and recorded. Is the process automated or manual? Do reviewers understand what they’re approving? 📌 Check Reviewer Accountability The right reviewers must validate access. Managers often approve lists without verifying if users still need access. That’s not an effective control. 📌 Validate Supporting Evidence Ask for proof of completed reviews, exported user lists, approval records, or tool reports. Look for sign-offs showing who performed the review and when. 📌 Sample and Test Accuracy Select samples and trace whether access rights align with job roles. Pay attention to dormant accounts, transferred employees, and contractors whose access wasn’t removed on time. 📌 Test Timeliness of Removals After terminations or role changes, how fast is access removed? Delayed deprovisioning is a frequent and serious finding. 📌 Evaluate Automation and Monitoring Automated user provisioning and recertification tools reduce manual errors. Check if they integrate with HR systems to detect changes in real time. Effective access reviews protect against internal fraud, data leaks, and compliance failures. They’re not paperwork; they’re proof that only the right people can reach critical assets. #ITAudit #AccessControl #UserAccessReview #InternalAudit #GRC #RiskManagement #ITControls #TechGovernance #Assurance #AuditLeadership #CyberVerge #CyberYard

Establishing a zero-trust Building Automation System (BAS) network configuration that is both secure and user-friendly involves a multi-layered approach focusing on strict access controls, continuous monitoring, and simplified user interfaces. Separate the BAS network from the IT network using VLANs and firewalls. Micro-Segmentation: Divide the BAS network into smaller segments to limit lateral movement in case of a breach. Identity and Access Management (IAM) Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for all users accessing the BAS. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC): Define and enforce access policies based on user roles and responsibilities. Least Privilege Principle, Ensure users have the minimum level of access necessary to perform their tasks. Device Authentication, Device Whitelisting Only allow pre-approved devices to connect to the BAS network. Use digital certificates to authenticate devices. Deploy Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) and Intrusion Prevention Systems (IPS) to continuously monitor network traffic. Use machine learning to identify and alert on abnormal behavior within the network. Encrypt Data in Transit: Use SSL/TLS to encrypt data transmitted over the network. Ensure sensitive data stored within the BAS is encrypted. Endpoint Security, Install endpoint protection software on all devices accessing the BAS. Regularly update and patch BAS devices to protect against vulnerabilities. Simplified User Interface, Implement a single, intuitive dashboard that provides visibility and control over the BAS network. Conduct regular training sessions to ensure users are familiar with the system and best security practices. Provide users with context-based access, where the system dynamically adjusts access rights based on the user’s current context (e.g., location, time of day). Policy Enforcement and Compliance, Use software-defined policies to automate enforcement of security rules and access controls. Regularly audit the BAS network to ensure compliance with industry standards and regulations. Incident Response and Recovery, Develop and maintain a comprehensive incident response plan. Conduct regular security drills to ensure the response team is prepared for potential breaches. Implement regular backups and ensure rapid recovery processes are in place. Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA): Deploy ZTNA solutions to enforce zero-trust principles across the network. Use Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems for real-time monitoring and analysis of security events. Utilize Network Access Control (NAC) to enforce security policy compliance on all devices attempting to access the BAS network. Regular Assessments: Continuously assess and update security policies and configurations. Ensure third-party vendors comply with your security standards. Foster a security-conscious culture among all users. Implementing these steps will help create a robust zero-trust BAS network that is both secure and user-friendly.

This case study highlights critical access control issues within a publicly-traded company utilizing Oracle Fusion Cloud: 1. Nearly every user has the potential to commit material fraud, particularly concerning the conversion process for supplier bank accounts. 2. There are 120 users with the ability to disable configurable audit logging. 3. A total of 102 users can bypass user provisioning approval through a spreadsheet import process to assign roles to other users. 4. Almost every user has access to the most powerful REST API, which can be easily utilized via Postman to enter or maintain any data. If auditors were equipped to test access controls, these four privileges alone could indicate two Significant Deficiencies related to role design and change management. Consider the implications: do you prefer an access control provider that identifies your actual risks, or are you comfortable paying $100,000 to a Big 4 firm to assess just 10 to 15 Segregation of Duties conflicts? These alarming findings stem from System Integrators failing to conduct negative testing against their role design. This represents a systemic flaw in how ERP projects are bid and awarded. If you are unaware of these issues, you may be relying on external auditors who lack the necessary expertise. Is that your Risk Management strategy? If you seek to ensure a successful Digital Transformation project that fosters a secure and controlled environment along with a clean audit, let's discuss how to achieve that.