We are delighted to share our new EIC Delivery Methodology for efficiently managing Saviynt Implementations and delivering quick time to value. CLICK HERE.

User Update Rule - Transfer Ownership - Replace Owner in Service Accounts

sk
All-Star
All-Star

Team,

We noticed that Transfer of Service Account Owner is not happening on termination of actual owner.

We have other actions like Transfer Entitlement Ownership, Replace User in Requests in Flight, Replace User in ResourceOwner, Replace User in Campaign Certifier etc in same user update rule and all them are working for terminated user as expected except service account ownership.

We tried below variations

1. Not assigned any Owner on Terminate but have Active Manager

2. Have Active Manager and also Owner on Terminate as User and we selected an Active User

3. Have Active Manager and Owner on Terminate as Secondary Manager and we selected secondary Manager as Active User.

None of the variations are working.

Also on Endpoint level we even  selected Service Account Type as Service Account

Are we missing anything else? or is it a bug or known issue in latest version?


Regards,
Saathvik
If this reply answered your question, please Accept As Solution and give Kudos to help others facing similar issue.
4 REPLIES 4

pruthvi_t
Saviynt Employee
Saviynt Employee

Hi @sk ,

There is no bug for service account ownership transfer for owner on terminate.

1. We had a test user for whom we assigned the secondary manager and selected owner on terminate as secondary manager.Screenshot 2023-02-23 at 4.34.30 PM.png

2. User is owner of a service account , we have disabled the user using CSV import. Selected to check rules.Screenshot 2023-02-23 at 4.35.09 PM.png

3. Rule OOT_Test1. Screenshot 2023-02-23 at 4.35.51 PM.png

4. After the rule was ran, the owner of the account was changed to secondary manager, i.e., Chaitanya in this case. Screenshot 2023-02-23 at 4.37.04 PM.png

Screenshot 2023-02-23 at 4.36.43 PM.png

Kindly check on your end if everything is configured as expected. 

Thanks,


Regards,
Pruthvi

@pruthvi_t : What is the version you validate this? We followed the same steps but we don't see this happening. Only change is in our use case update happened from UI and rule we created is also for UI.

Below is User: EAKS00517 profile screenshot

sk_0-1677247870326.png

Rule:

sk_2-1677248054525.png

sk_1-1677248029362.png

User Update History

sk_3-1677248106799.png

Service Account

sk_5-1677248699678.png

sk_4-1677248495334.png

Also as mentioned rest of the actions under same are working as expected

 

 


Regards,
Saathvik
If this reply answered your question, please Accept As Solution and give Kudos to help others facing similar issue.

pruthvi_t
Saviynt Employee
Saviynt Employee

@sk , I've validated it in 23.2 version.

Thanks,


Regards,
Pruthvi

Okay we are on v23.1, Is it possible to validate the same on this version? Or please let me us know if we are missing any other configuration


Regards,
Saathvik
If this reply answered your question, please Accept As Solution and give Kudos to help others facing similar issue.