Certified: The CISSP Prepcast

Welcome to The Bare Metal Cyber CISSP Prepcast. This series helps you prepare for the ISC squared CISSP exam with focused explanations and practical context.
Access recertification and review might sound like an administrative task, but for security professionals and CISSP candidates, it is one of the most effective mechanisms for enforcing least privilege, detecting abuse, and maintaining audit readiness. In this episode, we will look at what access recertification really means, why it is so critical for identity and access management, and how to implement it as part of a maturing security program.
Let’s begin with the basics. Access recertification is the process of regularly verifying that each user in an organization has only the access they currently need to perform their job duties. Over time, access can accumulate. Employees might transfer departments, change responsibilities, or be granted temporary access that is never revoked. Without a process to review and recertify access rights, users often retain excessive privileges that increase the potential for misuse or exploitation. Recertification solves this by systematically reviewing who has access to what, and confirming whether that access is still necessary and appropriate.
The most important goal of recertification is to enforce the principle of least privilege. This principle states that users should have only the minimum access necessary to complete their tasks. Recertification makes it possible to identify and remove access that is no longer justified. This reduces the organization’s attack surface and helps prevent both accidental and intentional misuse of systems and data. But beyond just strengthening security, access recertification also supports compliance. Regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation, the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, and the Sarbanes Oxley Act all require organizations to demonstrate that access is periodically reviewed and controlled.
From an exam perspective, it is important to understand that access recertification is not a one-time event. It is a recurring process that typically occurs on a regular schedule—such as quarterly or annually—and it may be triggered by specific events, such as an employee termination, a role change, or a major organizational restructuring. The review process should cover all types of access: user access to applications, database permissions, administrative privileges, and physical access where relevant.
Before recertification can occur, the organization must first identify what needs to be reviewed. This means compiling an inventory of user accounts and associated access rights. In practice, this data is often pulled from identity and access management systems, human resources databases, and application logs. The more centralized and integrated the environment, the easier this inventory becomes. Ideally, the organization maintains a role-based access control structure so that users inherit permissions from their assigned roles. This makes it much easier to validate access against expected patterns.
Once access data has been collected, the organization must determine who is responsible for reviewing and approving it. This is usually the user’s manager or the owner of the resource. These individuals have the context to determine whether the access still makes sense. In some cases, multiple approvers are needed. For example, a user’s manager might review general access, while a system administrator reviews technical privileges. If a reviewer finds that access is no longer needed, they should have the ability to revoke it immediately or flag it for action.
This brings us to the concept of certification and revocation. Certification means the access has been reviewed and approved. Revocation means the access has been deemed unnecessary or inappropriate and will be removed. Both outcomes should be documented, and the actions should be auditable. An audit trail helps the organization demonstrate compliance and investigate any discrepancies later.
For more cyber related content and books, please check out cyber author dot me. Also, there are other podcasts on Cybersecurity and more at Bare Metal Cyber dot com.
Access recertification can be manual or automated. Manual processes involve sending reports to reviewers, who then complete their evaluations and respond. Automated processes use identity governance tools that generate reports, send reminders, and even revoke access automatically if approval is not received in time. Automation reduces the burden on staff and improves consistency, but it still requires human oversight and policy enforcement.
A common challenge with recertification is reviewer fatigue. When managers are asked to approve dozens or hundreds of access entries, they may approve everything without reviewing each item carefully. To address this, organizations can use risk-based prioritization. High-risk access—such as administrator rights, access to sensitive data, or cross-functional privileges—should be reviewed more frequently and in greater detail. Low-risk access can be reviewed less often or grouped for faster evaluation.
Another best practice is to maintain clear documentation. This includes the policies that define how often reviews occur, what access types are included, who performs the reviews, and how findings are handled. Documentation should also describe escalation procedures for unresolved or contested access, as well as mechanisms for confirming that revoked access was actually removed. Without documentation, it is difficult to prove that recertification is occurring or that it is effective.
Training is also essential. Employees and managers need to understand why recertification matters and how to complete it properly. This reduces errors, ensures timely reviews, and supports a culture of security awareness. Training can be delivered through onboarding materials, computer-based modules, or quick reference guides built into the access management system.
From a CISSP exam perspective, remember that recertification is part of access control governance. It intersects with identity lifecycle management, auditing, compliance, and risk mitigation. Recertification also supports the broader goals of availability, integrity, and confidentiality. By ensuring that users have only the access they need, organizations protect data from unauthorized disclosure, prevent changes by unqualified users, and reduce the risk of availability disruptions caused by inappropriate permissions.
Let’s walk through a basic example. Imagine a mid-sized company with five hundred employees. The finance team uses a shared application to manage payroll. Over time, several employees from other departments were given access to this system to assist with various projects. Months later, those projects have ended, but no one remembered to revoke the access. During a quarterly access review, the finance manager notices these permissions and flags them for removal. The access is revoked, and the action is logged. Later, during an audit, the company is able to demonstrate that access reviews were performed, that inappropriate access was identified, and that corrective action was taken.
This example may sound simple, but it illustrates the entire purpose of recertification. Without the review, excess access would have continued unnoticed. With the review, the organization enforced least privilege, documented corrective action, and strengthened its security posture.
Access recertification can also help detect other issues, such as orphaned accounts. These are accounts that still exist after an employee has left the organization. If access reviews are conducted promptly after terminations, orphaned accounts can be detected and removed before they become a risk. Similarly, recertification may reveal accounts that were created improperly, given more access than needed, or never used. Each of these findings helps the organization improve both security and efficiency.
To summarize, access recertification is a foundational element of identity and access management. It helps enforce least privilege, detect unauthorized access, reduce risk, and meet compliance obligations. It involves gathering access data, assigning reviewers, validating permissions, revoking unnecessary access, and maintaining clear documentation and audit trails. Organizations can choose manual or automated approaches, but the goal remains the same: verify that every user has the right access—no more, no less.
As a future C I S S P, your role may include designing, implementing, or auditing these processes. You will need to understand both the technical and procedural components, and you will be expected to advocate for regular, risk-informed access reviews as part of a comprehensive security strategy.
Thanks for joining us for this episode of The Bare Metal Cyber CISSP Prepcast. For more episodes, tools, and study support, visit us at Bare Metal Cyber dot com.