Audit Trail Trigger Configuration

[alanbixby]

Is it possible to customize what actions trigger an Audit Trail event (notably enable certain triggers that appear to be missing)?

Based on the documentation, there should be many more actions logged than we currently see,  such as 

• Users who viewed their own and other users’ details
• Users who upload new users or update the attributes of existing users via a CSV file through Admin or Access Requests interface.

I don't see a direct way to toggle the logging behavior in Global Configuration, and it seems like the Audit Trail is intended to have everything on and then you filter for the results you want.

[prasannta]

Hi @alanbixby 

Right now there is no configuration available to enable certain trigger action for audit trail. The audit trail provides information if any saviynt object was affected by user interaction. For the scenarios that you have listed above:

• Users who viewed their own and other users’ details - If logged in user navigated to Admin -> Identity Repository -> Accounts and viewed any users account then that action will be captured.

• Users who upload new users or update the attributes of existing users via a CSV file through Admin or Access Requests interface - If logged in user uploads a set of users using csv file then that action will be captured with action as Upload, but the users who were updated will not be captured.

The Audit trail will capture all events and you can filter the data based on your requirement. Hope this clarifies your question.

Thanks

[alanbixby]

Thank you.

To solidify my understanding, if someone goes through Admin -> Identity Repository -> Users and makes an update to the "Users Details" or "Other Details" tab via the web interface, you would not expect an Audit Trail event to be triggered?

Based on the documentation I would expect your first bullet to be the Users who viewed and updated existing account details." trigger, not a the User trigger for "Users who viewed their own and other users’ details.".

[prasannta]

Hi @alanbixby 

I agree the documentation is not worded correctly here and I have provided feedback to the documentation team to correct the statement.

Thanks