G’Day All,

Considering the fact that so many people out here, have so selflessly shared their expertise through blogs, answers etc. So its only fair that I do my bit to balance the scales. Now if what I contribute is worth it or not, that’s a different story and I shall leave it to the moderators to judge for themselves.

The topic I would like to present to you is ARA. Just a heads up that whatever is presented here is just an overview of my understanding of what ARA is and how it works. I’ll leave it to the experts here to make corrections/suggestions if the need be for the benefit of everyone reading this document and myself included.


A lot of the key terminology has been explained rather brilliantly by Alessandro in the following two documents, so there is no point in me trying to reinvent the wheel.

http://scn.sap.com/docs/DOC-54434

http://scn.sap.com/docs/DOC-54530

So here we go.

Access Risk Analysis – ARA

Analyzing Risks associated with Access

Risk: when an Employee in a Company is assigned with Task/Tasks that could provide him/her with an opportunity to commit fraud

Employee -> Company -> Task/Tasks -> Opportunity -> Fraud

Tasks are assigned to the employee in form of Roles, which are made up of Actions/Tcodes, which in turn are made up Permissions/Authorizations

Workshops with BP Owners and other relevant personnel would have to be conducted to gather information about the Risks associated with the following:

Roles -> Actions/Transaction Codes -> Permissions/Authorizations

Role1                Action1  Action2             Permission1   Permission2

Role2                Action3  Action4             Permission3   Permission4

Based on the information gathered we need to define the Risks

    . Action1= Conflicting Action   .Action2= Conflicting Action.   Action3= Critical Action    .Permission1= Critical Permission

Function1= Action1   .Function2= Action2   .Function3=Action3   .Function4= Permission1

Risk 1= Function1+Function2 . Risk 2= Function3

Rule is a condition: If Function1+Function2 is given to a user Then it is a Risk 

Therefore Rule1 is generated against Function1, Function2 and Risk1

*Example: Action1= XK99: Vendor Mass Maintenance .Action2= ME2L: Maintain Purchase Order – Purchasing

Risk= Create a fictitious vendor and initiate purchases to that vendor


Run a Risk Analysis against all the Risks defined



Based on the Analysis, Remediate the Risks by executing cleanup process by Re-designing/defining the roles.

This can be done through Simulation to check if the defined Risks will be eliminated if  the cleanup is executed.


In certain unavoidable circumstances Remediation isn’t an option, so the solution is to Mitigate the Risk

                         Mitigation                       

 

Prevention Detection

Super User Access

Mitigation Control

Audits

Alerts

So when you create a Mitigation Control:

You specify the Risk Ids and the OU they are associated with->  The Risk Ids will look up the Function they are associated with->

Functions will look up the Actions (T-codes) they are associated with. Assign an Owner and Controller to the MC and 

tie all of this up to an end user/role/profile who is assigned with a role/roles, which could pose a threat. 


To Ensure all the hard work done so far does not go for a waste, run

SOD review, Audit Trails and Risk Analysis on a periodic basis



SOD Management Process

The entire process described above is termed as ‘SOD Management Process’.


Segregation of Duties (SoD) is an internal control within a Company implemented to prevent or decrease the risk of errors or regulatory irregularities and ensure corrective action is taken. Ideally, no one individual must have the authority of:

Creation .Modification .Reviewing .Deletion

SoD ensures no single user has access to separate phases of these business transactions. This is done by Dividing, Distributing and Allocating key tasks amongst various individuals thereby eliminating or at least reducing the possibility of errors and fraud. All of this is carried out in three separate phases:


Phase 1

Risk Recognition

Rule Building & Validation


Phase 2

Risk Analysis

Remediation

Mitigation


Phase 3

Continuous Compliance

*Credit for the following SOD Management Process flow goes to: Alessandro & Colleen

Steps Description
/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step1_530217.png

Gather a list of applicable SOD conflicts that allow fraud or generate significant errors. The outcome of this step is that your business has determined what is an unacceptable risk that they want to report on and manage via remediation or mitigation.

Helpful documents:

Risk Lifecycle

/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step2_530218.png

Build the rule set based on the recognized risks from step 1. The outcome of this step is the technical rule set to analyze the user and/or role assignments.

Helpful documents:

Business Risks / Rule Set

Rule set – Rules & Rule Types

/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step3_530237.png

Analyze the SoD output. This can be performed with the help of SAP GRC Access Control. In case of manual analysis, for each user, analyze if he/she has the access to perform any of the conflicting functions defined in step 1. The outcome is basically to provide the business insight to alternatives for correcting or eliminating discovered risks.

Helpful documents:

Online vs. Offline Risk Analysis

/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step4_530238.png

In this step, evaluate if the conflicting tasks can be performed by an alternate person. If so, role changes and/or user reassignments can be performed to segregate duties properly. The outcome must be a very low number of remaining risks that need mitigation.

Helpful documents:

Remediating Access Control SoD Risks

/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step5_530239.png

If it would not be possible to remediate the existing conflicts, consider formulating an appropriate control to mitigate the risk. This would typically entail working with the business to setup additional monitoring procedures that ensure to compensate the risk. The outcome must be no remaining risks.

Helpful documents:

Internal Controls – a step towards strong controls

Defining Mitigating Controls / Compensating Controls

Creation of Mitigation Controls in GRC 10.0

Mitigating Control Lifecycle

/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/step6_530240.png

Finally, establish a new continuous process wherein every access request is reviewed against the SoD conflict matrix prior to provisioning on the system. Also make sure that all role changes must be analyzed and remediated before implementing. The outcome, and also final result, your system remains clean.

Helpful documents:

Approve/Reject Own Requests

Risk Terminator on SAP Wiki

Configuration in a Nutshell

Now that we’ve covered the what and the why part we have to get our hands dirty and physically create them. If you have access to a Server, after following SAP documentation for ‘From Post-Installation to First Risk Analysis’ and ‘Enhanced Access Risk Analysis’, try executing the following tasks:


  1. Create test users using SU01
  2. Create test roles with Critical/Conflicting Actions using PFCG
  3. Assign role/roles to test users including roles for Risk Owner , Mitigation Controller
  4. Create Access Control Owners in NWBC
  5. Activate/Check following BC Sets using ‘SCPR20’
    • GRAC_RA_RULESET_COMMON
    • GRAC_RA_RULESET_SAP_R3
    • GRAC_RA_RULESET_SAP_HR (Optional)
  6. Check Configuration Parameters of Risk Analysis: SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Access Control -> Maintain Configuration Settings
    • Risk Analysis
    • Function Maintenance
    • Mitigation Maintenance
    • Change Log
  7. Create/Check Business Process and Sub Process: SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Access Control -> Maintain Business Process and Sub processes
    • This will come in handy when creating Functions and Risks
  8. Create Organizations: SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Shared Master Data -> create a Root Organization Hierarchy
    • You cannot create a Mitigation Control without this
  9. Add Owners to the created Organization in NWBC: Setup -> Organizations
  10. Run following Sync Jobs:  SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Access Control -> Synchronization Jobs
    • Authorization Sync
    • Repository Object Sync
  11. Create the following in NWBC
    • Functions
    • Access Risks
    • Mitigation Control
  12. Run a Risk Analysis against the Risks at Role level and after the cleanup at User level
  13. Remediate using Simulation and see if it works
  14. Mitigate Risks against User/Role/Profile
  15. Create Alerts: SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Access Control -> ARA -> Generate Alerts
  16. Setup Batch Risk Analysis on a periodic basis:  SPRO -> IMG -> GRC -> Access Control -> ARA -> Batch Risk Analysis
  17. Setup SOD/UAR Review

I sincerely hope this document will help you in your pursuit to get a grasp on what ARA is all about.For a more comprehensive understanding/configuration and other bits and pieces on this topic, please check out the links in the following document put together by Alessandro, which covers everything in detail. Please check under Access Risk Analysis (ARA).

http://scn.sap.com/docs/DOC-57438


Regards,

Leo..

To report this post you need to login first.

8 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

    1. S A Post author

      No worries Alessandro. Thanks for letting me use your material.

      I’ve added you to this document so if you wanna make any changes or add to your process flow, please go for it.

      Cheers

      Leo..

      (0) 
    2. S A Post author

      Hi Alessandro,

      The link to ‘Risk Terminator – GRC10’ isn’t working. Can you look into it please.

      Regards,

      Leo..

      (0) 
        1. S A Post author

          All Good! working now. While we are at it, just wondering if ‘Approve/Reject Own Requests’ is more of an ARM related topic right? What do you think?

          Regards,

          Leo..

          (0) 
          1. Alessandro Banzer

            Fully agree – it’s more ARM related. But even though it is a key point to guarantee continuous compliance. Staying clean means also to ensure that all the processes are seamlessly compliant.

            Regards,

            Alessandro

            (0) 
            1. S A Post author

              No Worries! I could see why you included under Continuous Compliance but just wanted to double check.

              Cheers

              Leo..

              (0) 
              1. Alessandro Banzer

                cool 😉 as ARA is the main module of GRC it is always linked and used in the others. Hence splitting up all the tasks is very difficult and personally I recommend to implement a 4-eyes-principle everywhere. Thats why I put that under this section.

                (0) 

Leave a Reply