performing-privileged-account-access-review
Conduct systematic reviews of privileged accounts to validate access rights, identify excessive permissions, and enforce least privilege across PAM infrastructure.
Best use case
performing-privileged-account-access-review is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Conduct systematic reviews of privileged accounts to validate access rights, identify excessive permissions, and enforce least privilege across PAM infrastructure.
Teams using performing-privileged-account-access-review should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/performing-privileged-account-access-review/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How performing-privileged-account-access-review Compares
| Feature / Agent | performing-privileged-account-access-review | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Conduct systematic reviews of privileged accounts to validate access rights, identify excessive permissions, and enforce least privilege across PAM infrastructure.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
AI Agents for Coding
Browse AI agent skills for coding, debugging, testing, refactoring, code review, and developer workflows across Claude, Cursor, and Codex.
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
Cursor vs Codex for AI Workflows
Compare Cursor and Codex for AI coding workflows, repository assistance, debugging, refactoring, and reusable developer skills.
SKILL.md Source
# Performing Privileged Account Access Review
## Overview
Privileged Account Access Review is a critical identity governance process that validates whether users with elevated permissions still require their access. This review covers domain admins, service accounts, database administrators, cloud IAM roles, and application-level privileged accounts. Regular access reviews are mandated by SOC 2, PCI DSS, HIPAA, and SOX compliance frameworks, typically required quarterly for high-privilege accounts.
## When to Use
- When conducting security assessments that involve performing privileged account access review
- When following incident response procedures for related security events
- When performing scheduled security testing or auditing activities
- When validating security controls through hands-on testing
## Prerequisites
- PAM solution deployed (CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Delinea, or equivalent)
- Identity governance platform (SailPoint, Saviynt, or equivalent)
- Complete inventory of privileged accounts across all platforms
- Defined access review policy with SLAs and escalation procedures
- Designated reviewers (account owners, managers, security team)
## Core Concepts
### Privileged Account Categories
| Category | Examples | Risk Level | Review Frequency |
|----------|----------|------------|-----------------|
| Domain Admins | Enterprise Admin, Domain Admin, Schema Admin | Critical | Monthly |
| Service Accounts | SQL service, backup agents, monitoring agents | High | Quarterly |
| Cloud IAM | AWS root, Azure Global Admin, GCP Owner | Critical | Monthly |
| Database Admin | DBA accounts, sa/sys accounts | High | Quarterly |
| Application Admin | App admin roles, API keys with admin scope | Medium | Semi-annually |
| Emergency/Break-glass | Firecall accounts, emergency access | Critical | After each use |
### Four-Pillar Review Framework
```
DISCOVER VALIDATE REMEDIATE MONITOR
│ │ │ │
├─ Enumerate all ├─ Verify business ├─ Remove excess ├─ Continuous
│ privileged accounts │ justification │ privileges │ monitoring
│ │ │ │
├─ Identify orphaned ├─ Confirm account ├─ Disable orphaned ├─ Anomaly
│ accounts │ ownership │ accounts │ detection
│ │ │ │
├─ Map permissions to ├─ Check compliance ├─ Enforce password ├─ Session
│ business roles │ with policies │ rotation │ recording
│ │ │ │
└─ Classify by risk └─ Review last usage └─ Implement JIT └─ Audit
level and activity access logging
```
## Workflow
### Step 1: Account Discovery and Inventory
Enumerate all privileged accounts across the environment:
**Active Directory:**
- Domain Admins, Enterprise Admins, Schema Admins groups
- Accounts with AdminCount=1 attribute
- Service accounts with SPN (Service Principal Names)
- Accounts with delegation rights (Unconstrained/Constrained)
**Cloud Platforms:**
- AWS: IAM users/roles with AdministratorAccess, PowerUserAccess, or `iam:*` permissions
- Azure: Global Administrator, Privileged Role Administrator, Security Administrator roles
- GCP: Owner, Editor roles at organization/project level
**Databases:**
- SQL Server: sysadmin, db_owner, securityadmin fixed roles
- Oracle: DBA, SYSDBA, SYSOPER privileges
- PostgreSQL: superuser, createrole, createdb attributes
### Step 2: Establish Review Criteria
Each privileged account must be evaluated against:
1. **Business Justification**: Does the user's current role require this privilege?
2. **Least Privilege**: Can the task be performed with lower privileges?
3. **Account Activity**: Has the account been active in the last 90 days?
4. **Compliance Status**: Does the account meet password policy, MFA requirements?
5. **Separation of Duties**: Does the access create SoD conflicts?
6. **Ownership**: Is a responsible owner assigned and active?
### Step 3: Conduct the Review
For each account, the designated reviewer must:
1. Review the account details, permissions, and last activity date
2. Approve (certify) the access if still required with documented justification
3. Revoke access if no longer needed or the reviewer cannot justify the privilege
4. Flag for investigation if anomalous activity or policy violations are detected
5. Escalate if the reviewer cannot make a determination
Decision matrix:
| Condition | Action |
|-----------|--------|
| Active user, justified privilege | Certify - maintain access |
| Active user, excessive privilege | Remediate - reduce to least privilege |
| Inactive > 90 days | Disable account, notify owner |
| No owner identified | Disable account, escalate to security |
| SoD conflict detected | Remediate - reassign or add compensating controls |
| Break-glass account | Verify last use was authorized, reset credentials |
### Step 4: Remediation and Enforcement
After reviews are completed:
- Revoke access for accounts that were not certified within the SLA period
- Implement automatic revocation for accounts not reviewed within 14 days
- Rotate credentials for all certified privileged accounts
- Convert standing privileges to just-in-time (JIT) access where possible
- Update PAM vault with current account inventory
### Step 5: Reporting and Documentation
Generate review reports including:
- Total accounts reviewed vs. total in scope
- Certification rate (approved vs. revoked)
- Average review completion time
- Overdue reviews and escalations
- Remediation actions taken
- Comparison with previous review cycle
## Validation Checklist
- [ ] Complete inventory of all privileged accounts documented
- [ ] All accounts assigned to a responsible owner/reviewer
- [ ] Review criteria and decision matrix defined
- [ ] Reviewers completed certification within SLA (14 days)
- [ ] Revoked accounts disabled and credentials rotated
- [ ] Orphaned accounts identified and disabled
- [ ] Service accounts reviewed for least privilege
- [ ] Break-glass accounts audited for authorized use only
- [ ] Review report generated with metrics and trends
- [ ] Remediation tickets created and tracked to completion
- [ ] Evidence preserved for compliance audit
## References
- [NIST SP 800-53 AC-2: Account Management](https://csf.tools/reference/nist-sp-800-53/r5/ac/ac-2/)
- [CIS Controls v8 - Control 5: Account Management](https://www.cisecurity.org/controls/account-management)
- [Netwrix PAM Best Practices Guide](https://netwrix.com/en/resources/guides/privileged-account-management-best-practices/)
- [StrongDM PAM Best Practices 2025](https://www.strongdm.com/blog/privileged-access-management-best-practices)Related Skills
testing-for-broken-access-control
Systematically testing web applications for broken access control vulnerabilities including privilege escalation, missing function-level checks, and insecure direct object references.
securing-remote-access-to-ot-environment
This skill covers implementing secure remote access to OT/ICS environments for operators, engineers, and vendors while preventing unauthorized access that could compromise industrial operations. It addresses jump server architecture, multi-factor authentication, session recording, privileged access management, vendor remote access controls, and compliance with IEC 62443 and NERC CIP-005 remote access requirements.
performing-yara-rule-development-for-detection
Develop precise YARA rules for malware detection by identifying unique byte patterns, strings, and behavioral indicators in executable files while minimizing false positives.
performing-wireless-security-assessment-with-kismet
Conduct wireless network security assessments using Kismet to detect rogue access points, hidden SSIDs, weak encryption, and unauthorized clients through passive RF monitoring.
performing-wireless-network-penetration-test
Execute a wireless network penetration test to assess WiFi security by capturing handshakes, cracking WPA2/WPA3 keys, detecting rogue access points, and testing wireless segmentation using Aircrack-ng and related tools.
performing-windows-artifact-analysis-with-eric-zimmerman-tools
Perform comprehensive Windows forensic artifact analysis using Eric Zimmerman's open-source EZ Tools suite including KAPE, MFTECmd, PECmd, LECmd, JLECmd, and Timeline Explorer for parsing registry hives, prefetch files, event logs, and file system metadata.
performing-wifi-password-cracking-with-aircrack
Captures WPA/WPA2 handshakes and performs offline password cracking using aircrack-ng, hashcat, and dictionary attacks during authorized wireless security assessments to evaluate passphrase strength and wireless network security posture.
performing-web-cache-poisoning-attack
Exploiting web cache mechanisms to serve malicious content to other users by poisoning cached responses through unkeyed headers and parameters during authorized security tests.
performing-web-cache-deception-attack
Execute web cache deception attacks by exploiting path normalization discrepancies between CDN caching layers and origin servers to cache and retrieve sensitive authenticated content.
performing-web-application-vulnerability-triage
Triage web application vulnerability findings from DAST/SAST scanners using OWASP risk rating methodology to separate true positives from false positives and prioritize remediation.
performing-web-application-scanning-with-nikto
Nikto is an open-source web server and web application scanner that tests against over 7,000 potentially dangerous files/programs, checks for outdated versions of over 1,250 servers, and identifies ve
performing-web-application-penetration-test
Performs systematic security testing of web applications following the OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) methodology to identify vulnerabilities in authentication, authorization, input validation, session management, and business logic. The tester uses Burp Suite as the primary interception proxy alongside manual testing techniques to find flaws that automated scanners miss. Activates for requests involving web app pentest, OWASP testing, application security assessment, or web vulnerability testing.