[searchandfilter taxonomies="search"]

What is Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) Section 404?

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002 was a landmark piece of legislation enacted in response to major accounting scandals that shook investor confidence in the early 2000s. A central component of this sarbanes oxley act, Section 404 addresses the critical need for robust internal controls over financial reporting in publicly traded companies. This article provides a comprehensive overview of sox section 404, its requirements, challenges, and benefits, along with practical guidance for sox 404 compliance. This article helps to understand what is sox 404.

What is SOX 404?

SOX 404, also known as Sarbanes Oxley 404, mandates that all publicly traded companies, referred to as SEC issuers (companies with securities registered under Section 12 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934), must establish, document, test, and maintain internal controls and procedures for financial reporting. The core objective is to reduce the risks of corporate fraud and improve the accuracy and reliability of financial statements disclosures by enhancing the rigor of financial reporting methods and regulations. This helps to ensure that companies are managing their financials effectively.

Specifically, sox section 404 has three key subsections:

Section 404(a)

Section 404(a) requires management of all public issuers to conduct an annual assessment of the operating effectiveness of their company’s internal controls over financial reporting. This includes documenting internal controls and reporting the results of management’s assessment in the company’s Form 10-K. Management is responsible for establishing an adequate internal control structure and procedures for preparing financial statements.

Section 404(b)

Section 404(b) mandates that an independent auditor attest to, and report on, management’s assessment of its internal controls. This independent auditor should not be part of the company’s internal audit committee. The auditor’s opinion on the company’s internal controls is also reported in the audit report section of the Form 10-K. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) sets the rules for these audits.

Section 404(c)

Section 404(c) provides exemptions to certain organizations from the auditor attestation requirements of section 404(b). These exemptions are primarily for “non-accelerated filers” (companies with a public float of less than $75 million) and “emerging growth companies” (EGC) with total annual gross revenue of less than $1.235 billion in the most recent fiscal year. Note that EGC thresholds can change periodically and require checking for the current values.

The Purpose and Scope of SOX 404

The primary purpose of sarbanes oxley act section 404 is to ensure that financial statements are reliable and free from material misstatements. This is achieved through a top-down risk assessment approach. The management is responsible for assessing and confirming that the internal controls are designed effectively and operating as intended. This process is a key component of sox compliance.

Key Requirements of SOX Section 404

Management Responsibility:

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting. At the end of each fiscal year, management must assess the effectiveness of these controls using a suitable and recognized control framework, such as the framework developed by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

Internal Control Report:

Each annual report must include an Internal Control Report stating management’s responsibility and an assessment of the control structure’s effectiveness. Any identified shortcomings in these controls must also be reported.

Auditor’s Attestation:

External auditors must attest to the accuracy of management’s assessment that internal accounting controls are in place, operating, and effectively, except in cases of exemption as defined in section 404(c).

Documentation:

Companies must maintain documented evidence of the design and operation of their internal controls. Following documentation process is required to ensure sox 404 compliance.

Annual Assessment:

The internal control assessment is an annual requirement, and controls must be evaluated and updated regularly.

Addressing Deficiencies:

Any identified control deficiencies must be evaluated to determine if they constitute a “material weakness” – a deficiency that creates a reasonable possibility of a material misstatement in the financial statements. If material weaknesses exist, they must be reported, and plans to address them must be outlined in the report.

Challenges of SOX 404 Compliance

Implementing sox 404 compliance can be complex and challenging, particularly for smaller companies. Common difficulties include:

Cost: The added resources and personnel costs involved in implementation, documenting, and monitoring an internal control framework can be substantial. This includes employing subject matter experts, external consultants, or hiring a public accounting firm.
Time: The development of an internal control framework is time-consuming, requiring careful identification, design, documentation, implementation, and ongoing monitoring of controls.
Documentation Complexity: Detailed documentation is crucial for proving the effectiveness of internal controls, requiring time and expertise.
Maintaining Precision: Setting the correct “precision” for each control (the monetary threshold that triggers a review) is critical. If set too low, controls are inefficient; if set too high, they become ineffective.
Continuous Monitoring: The internal control framework must be reviewed, updated, and tested continuously to ensure ongoing effectiveness and address changes within the organization.

Steps to SOX 404 Compliance

To achieve sox 404 compliance, companies should take the following steps:

Identification:

Identify all key processes that impact financial reporting and perform a risk assessment of each, creating risk matrices for all processes such as revenue, procurement, and related-party transactions.

Design and Documentation

Design and document each control, including who performs it, how often, what documentation is required, and the level of precision.

Implementation

Implement the designed controls, providing added time to employees to perform and document controls effectively.

Monitoring:

Continuously review and update the internal control framework, making changes as an organization grows and business practices evolve, this is key for maintaining sarbanes oxley 404 compliance.

Benefits of SOX 404 Compliance

While sox 404 implementation presents challenges, the benefits are substantial:

Improved Financial Reporting: Reduces the risks of errors and misstatements in financial reporting.
Enhanced Investor Confidence: Increases investors confidence that financial statements are accurate and reliable.
Stronger Internal Controls: Mitigates the risk of material errors going undetected.
Defined Responsibilities: Clearly defines employee roles and responsibilities, improving work performance and reducing turnover.
Improved Business Understanding: Enhances both management and employees’ understanding of business operations.
Reduced Audit Adjustments: Minimizes the number of audit adjustments from external auditors.
Reduced Fraud Risk: Mitigates the risk of fraudulent related-party transactions and overall corporate fraud.
Improved Corporate Governance: Strengthens corporate governance and overall operational integrity.
Increased Transparency: Provides additional transparency to the board of directors regarding financial reporting.
Better Data Integrity and Cybersecurity: Strengthens data integrity and cybersecurity to minimize the threat of cyber and ransomware attacks.
Standardized Accounting Procedures: Provides standardized accounting and finance procedures for multi-national organizations.

Automating SOX 404 Compliance

Given the challenges, Appsian’s sox management software can help to reduce implementation time, costs, and ongoing monitoring requirements. Automated platforms aid in building and scaling internal controls, streamlining compliance efforts. Sox 404 audit processes are greatly improved with automation.

Conclusion

Sarbanes Oxley section 404 is a vital component of the sarbanes oxley act, designed to improve the accuracy and reliability of financial reporting by publicly traded companies. While compliance can be complex and challenging, the benefits of robust internal controls are substantial. By implementing a well-designed internal control framework and actively monitoring its effectiveness, companies can mitigate fraud risks, improve financial reporting, and enhance investor confidence. It is imperative that companies, even those exempt from section 404(b), take their section 404(a) requirements seriously, as failure to do so can lead to serious penalties. Section 404 of the sarbanes-oxley act requires companies to: establish effective sox 404 controls. Section 404 of the sarbanes-oxley act requires continuous assessment, which should be included in an annual report. This entire process of sox 404 is crucial for maintaining internal control over financial statements. Section 404 sox is most effectively handled through diligent testing and evaluation, using internal resources and external auditors as needed.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

Comprehensive Guide to SOX Compliance

What is the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act?

Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) is a landmark legislation enacted by the United States Congress in 2002 that requires all public companies traded on U.S. stock exchanges to follow strict rules for financial reporting, ensuring accuracy and integrity of financial information disclosures.

What is SOX compliance?

SOX compliance is a set of processes and activities that ensure an organization is following the principles and requirements prescribed in the SOX act.

History of SOX

In 2001-2002, Wall Street was rocked by a string of corporate scandals, all related to improper financial disclosures. These scandals wiped out billions of dollars of investors’ and employees’ funds, shook public confidence, and created a need for better regulation of financial reporting. Just the two largest failures, Enron and WorldCom, lost over $250 billions of investors’ money and filed for bankruptcy.

To prevent fraudulent and misleading financial practices, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX), named after Senator Paul Sarbanes and Representative Michael G. Oxley, was enacted in 2002. The Act standardized financial reporting practices by mandating strict internal controls, increasing auditor independence, and establishing both civil and criminal liability for C-suite executives based on their attestation of financial disclosures. In addition, SOX created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) – a nonprofit organization whose main function is to regulate and oversee the accounting firms that conduct SOX audits; it audits the auditors.

Why SOX Compliance Matters

Organizations that are SOX compliant – i.e., follow practices that ensure accuracy, integrity, and transparency in their financial reporting – improve trust with shareholders, avoid potential legal repercussions of non-compliance (which may include civil and criminal liability and substantial fines), and improve their risk and cybersecurity postures.

Overview of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The enactment of SOX has had a significant impact on corporate governance, financial transparency, and investor confidence. By mandating rigorous practices in financial reporting, internal controls, and risk management, and introducing personal responsibility of the executives for accuracy and transparency in financial reporting, SOX restored public confidence, reduced corporate fraud, and improved accuracy in financial disclosures.

Key Provisions of SOX

Following are the key provisions of SOX Compliance:

Creating the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)
Strengthening Financial Reporting Requirements
Making Corporate Executives Personally Responsible for Financial Disclosures and Controls
Increasing Independence for External Auditors and Analysts
Protecting Whistleblowers

Creating the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)

Section 101 of the SOX Act mandates the creation of a non-profit organization – the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) – that oversees standards and requirements for organizations conducting external SOX compliance audits of compliant entities.

Strengthening Financial Reporting Requirements

SOX mandates companies to implement effective internal controls over financial reporting, ensuring data integrity and transparency in financial disclosures. It also requires organizations to undergo assessment of the effectiveness of such controls and immediately disclose any material changes to financial reports and control deficiencies.

Making Corporate Executives Personally Responsible for Financial Disclosures and Controls

Under SOX, corporate executives are personally responsible for the accuracy and completeness of financial disclosures. There are two sections of the Act dealing with that: Section 302 requires CEOs and CFOs to personally certify the disclosures and introduces civil penalties, while Section 906 introduces criminal liability for knowing or willful non-compliance.

Increasing Independence for External Auditors and Analysts

Section 201 of SOX imposes strict rules on external auditor independence, prohibiting them from providing certain non-audit services to organizations to prevent conflicts of interest. These prohibited services include financial services, investment consulting, recruiting, accounting, services related to audit processes, and any services that PCAOB deems prohibited. In addition, Section 301 mandates that audit committees must operate independently, which ensures the objective nature of their assessments.

Protecting Whistleblowers

SOX Sections 806 and 1107 specifically provide protection for employees or persons who provide truthful information to federal authorities about deficiencies or fraud in financial reports. These protections safeguard against retaliation and harassment and include remedies such as reinstatement and back pay.

Who Must Comply with SOX?

Regulatory obligations for SOX compliance apply to all US publicly traded companies and their subsidiaries. The SOX act also requires all international companies traded on US stock exchanges to abide by the same strict rules of financial reporting.

Private Companies and Non-profit Organizations

While private companies and nonprofit organizations are not required to be SOX compliant, many choose to implement its core principles, especially those working with public companies, preparing for IPOs, or seeking to improve their risk management and governance practices.

Accounting Companies

Accounting firms providing auditing services to public companies must be SOX compliant and adhere to PCAOB oversight, ensuring integrity and accuracy of their audits.

Key SOX Compliance Requirements

Filing Accurate Financial Reports Certified by Corporate Executives

Section 302 requires CEOs and CFOs to review and certify the accuracy and completeness of financial reports, holding them personally accountable for any misstatements or discrepancies.

Implementing Appropriate Internal Controls

Section 404 mandates organizations to establish and maintain internal controls over financial reporting (ICFRs) and conduct thorough, continuous assessments of these controls. These controls fall into two main categories as follows:

Business Process Controls	IT Controls
Controls governing material financial information	Controls governing IT systems that enable financial reporting accuracy, integrity and availability

Let’s look at each of the following in detail.

Business Process Controls

Companies must analyze their operations to identify risks and implement appropriate controls across all areas that affect financial reporting. This includes key business processes such as purchasing, payroll, revenue recognition, logistics, accounts payable/receivable, inventory management, asset management, treasury operations, and other operations that can materially impact the organization’s financial statements.

IT Controls

IT controls under SOX require organizations to establish effective processes that govern systems affecting financial reporting. Organizations can implement these controls using established frameworks such as COBIT, ISO 27001, or NIST to ensure systems align with best practices and can be easily harmonized with SOX requirements.

Real-Time Disclosure of Financial Changes

Section 409 requires companies to disclose material changes to their financial condition or operations within four business days of occurrence. This ensures timely disclosure of events that could significantly impact the company’s financial reporting.

Passing Regular Audits

SOX compliance, specifically Section 404(b), requires passing regular internal and external audits, assessing effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting and ensuring data integrity to enable complete and accurate financial disclosures.

SOX Compliance Benefits

SOX compliance provides significant organizational benefits including enhanced risk management, increased stakeholder trust, improved financial reporting accuracy and strengthened internal controls.

Financial Stewardship

SOX compliance fosters financial stewardship by ensuring accuracy and transparency in financial reporting, enables better planning and resource allocation, and allows companies to better align financial operations with their strategic goals.

Improved Reporting

As a direct result of established internal controls over financial reporting, organizations gain better insight into their operations and can make better-informed decisions, relying on more accurate and readily available data.

Enhanced Cybersecurity

SOX requires companies to establish and maintain IT General Controls (ITGCs) that ensure security, integrity and availability of corporate systems and data, greatly improving overall security posture. Popular frameworks such as COBIT or ISO 27001 are commonly used to implement ITGCs.

Better Collaboration

Establishing SOX compliance requires organizations to create interdepartmental committees that work on implementing and maintaining internal controls and coordinate cross-functional compliance efforts, improving operational efficiency and leading to better collaboration between Finance, IT, Compliance, and other organizational units.

Risk Prioritization

One of the core tasks of a SOX compliant entity is to identify, monitor and mitigate existing and emerging risks to financial reporting and internal controls, thereby improving organizational risk posture.

Challenges of SOX Compliance

SOX compliance presents significant challenges to organizations in terms of implementation costs, resource allocation and technology investments. Key challenges include:

Expense of external audits
Maintaining dedicated compliance staff
Implementing control monitoring systems
Ongoing training requirements.

SOX Key Sections

Some sections in SOX act enable us to identify the key scope of compliance requirements. Let’s have a look at each of these sections:

Section 302: Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports

Section 302 of SOX establishes the personal responsibility of the CEO and CFO for the accuracy of the company’s financial reports. The executives must certify the following:

The correctness and completeness of financial statements
The establishment and effectiveness of internal controls and any identified deficiencies in existing controls.

Non-compliance with Section 302 can result in civil penalties including fines up to $1 million per violation, forfeiture of performance-based compensation, and prohibition from serving as an officer in a public company.

Section 303: Improper Influence on Conduct of Audits

Section 303 deals with ensuring auditor independence and prohibits any attempt to influence, coerce, or manipulate auditors in ways that may affect their objectivity and independence.

Section 401: Disclosures in Periodic Reports

Section 401 of SOX requires organizations to publish quarterly (10-Q) and annual (10-K) filings in an accurate and consistent manner. All reports must adhere to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and include all material financial transactions, off-balance-sheet obligations, and financial arrangements to provide a complete picture of the company’s financial health.

Section 404: Management Assessment of Internal Controls

Section 404 requires management to establish, document, and maintain internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR). It also requires companies to establish internal audit processes to evaluate ICFR and assess their effectiveness, with both management and external auditors providing annual assessments of these controls.

Section 409: Real-Time Issuer Disclosures

Section 409 requires companies to disclose any material changes to their financial condition or operations in a rapid and current manner to protect investor interests. Companies must report these material events within four business days of occurrence.

Section 802: Criminal Penalties for Altering Documents

Section 802 mandates retention of all audit records, business documents, and audit related electronic communications for seven years and imposes criminal penalties, including imprisonment, for any intentional alteration, falsification, or concealment of documentation intended to impede federal investigations.

Section 806: Whistleblower Protection

Section 806 provides protection for employees of public companies from retaliation by prohibiting employers from discharging, suspending, threatening, harassing, or discriminating against employees who report fraudulent activities. It allows whistleblowers to file complaints with the Department of Labor within 90 days of experiencing retaliation and seek remedies including reinstatement, back pay, and compensatory damages.

Section 906: Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports

Section 906 complements Section 302 by establishing criminal liability for CEOs and CFOs who certify financial reports. While Section 302 imposes civil penalties, Section 906 establishes criminal penalties for willfully or knowingly false certifications. Executives face fines up to $5 million per violation and up to 20 years’ imprisonment for willful violations, or up to $1 million- and 10-years imprisonment for known violations.

Section 1107: Retaliation Against Informants

Section 1107 complements Section 806 by extending protection from retaliation to any person providing truthful information to law enforcement about federal offenses, establishing criminal penalties that can result in fines and up to 10 years imprisonment.

By adopting one of the popular frameworks such as COBIT or ISO 27001 for ITGC companies will have most of the following fulfilled

Prevent Data Tampering

Make sure all systems containing financial data operate while ensuring data security, integrity, and availability. Systems must have comprehensive access controls based on RBAC and need-to-know principles, with audit trails and backups enabled and regularly tested.

Document Activity Timelines

Maintain detailed audit trails of all financial activities that include timestamps for all transactions and data modifications.

Install Access Tracking Controls

Implement systems that monitor and audit access to financial systems and sensitive data.

Ensure Defense Systems Are Working

Perform regular testing and updates of cybersecurity defense systems, such as endpoint protection, firewalls, IPS and similar controls.

Collect and Analyze Security System Data

Make sure Audit Trails are not only collected, but also analyzed, with alerts on key metrics enabled and delivered to relevant parties.

Implement Security-Breach-Tracking

Develop and implement a Security Incident Response Plan and Incident Management Procedures to document and respond to security breaches and incidents.

Grant Auditors Defense System Access

Provide auditors with evidence of security systems performing as expected and grant them access when required or requested.

Disclose Security Incidents to Auditors

Share with auditors’ documentation of security incidents and breaches, along with steps taken for remediation.

Report Technical Difficulties to Auditors

Inform auditors of any technical difficulties that affect internal controls and could impact financial reporting.

Key Steps in the SOX Audit Process

Defining a SOX Audit Scope Using a Risk Assessment Approach

Section 404 requires organizations to conduct comprehensive risk assessment to determine areas critical for financial reporting accuracy. This assessment establishes materiality thresholds and defines which business processes, systems, and controls require evaluation during the audit.

Identify SOX Controls

Organizations must evaluate controls at multiple levels to ensure comprehensive coverage of financial reporting risks. This includes assessment of entity-level controls (ELCs) governing organizational oversight, process-level controls managing daily operations, and technology controls ensuring data integrity and security.

Testing and Documentation

The audit process requires systematic testing of control effectiveness through transaction sampling and process analysis. Organizations must maintain detailed documentation of test procedures, results, and any identified control deficiencies. This documentation supports both internal review and external auditor assessment.

Deficiency Evaluation

Organizations must assess any identified control weaknesses based on their potential impact on financial reporting. Material weaknesses require immediate management attention, documented remediation plans, and disclosure in management’s annual assessment report.

Management Reporting

The process concludes with management’s formal assessment of control effectiveness, including detailed analysis of any identified deficiencies and their potential impact on financial statements. This report provides the foundation for external auditor review and stakeholder confidence in financial reporting integrity.

Familiarize Yourself with These Organizations

PCAOB

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) is a nonprofit organization established by SOX to oversee accounting firms that audit public companies and certify the effectiveness of internal controls and accuracy of financial statements.

COSO

The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) framework is widely used as the standard for establishing and evaluating internal controls for SOX compliance.

ISACA

ISACA (Information Systems Audit and Control Association) offers guidance on IT governance and compliance through its COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies) framework.

NIST

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) develops cybersecurity standards and guidelines that, while designed for federal institutions, are widely adopted by organizations to establish effective compliance regimes.

ISO

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) publishes globally recognized standards such as ISO 27001, providing guidance on implementing effective controls for information security, data protection, and IT governance.

SOX IT General Controls (ITGCs) and Security

SOX ITGCs are the bedrock of a SOX compliant environment. Essential processes including access control, authentication mechanisms, data protection, audit trails, environment segregation, change management, and backup and disaster recovery are all effectively managed when an organization adopts and implements one of the established IT governance frameworks such as COBIT or ISO 27001.

Simplify SOX Compliance with Purpose-Built Technology

Organizations should look for solutions specifically built to support SOX compliance, where systems monitoring is automated, mitigations and material changes have complete audit trails, and documentation is ready for SOX audits without manual effort.

Software and Tools for SOX Compliance

SOX compliance software includes Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) platforms, enterprise resource planning (ERP) tools like SAP, and IT service management solutions. These tools support control monitoring, risk assessment, and reporting. Additionally, cybersecurity solutions like SIEM systems and identity governance platforms enhance security controls critical to SOX compliance (ISACA, 2021; Forrester, 2023).

SOX Compliance: A Continuous Control Environment

One of the biggest challenges of maintaining effective SOX compliance is its continuous nature. Once internal controls over financial reporting (ICFRs) are established, they require constant monitoring and improvement. Organizations must continuously mitigate existing risks, identify emerging risks, and implement updated control strategies.

The compliance process requires organizations to identify risks, implement mitigations, and document all relevant business transactions—a process that can be resource-intensive. While automation can significantly improve efficiency, selecting and implementing appropriate technology solutions requires careful evaluation and investment.

SOX compliance can be automated with in organization by implementing certain frameworks as below.

Risk Assessment Framework

Modern compliance platforms transform SOX adherence by integrating risk analysis directly into core business processes. This includes real-time evaluation of segregation of duties, automated scanning for sensitive access risks, and continuous monitoring of transaction patterns. Through automated risk scoring and impact quantification, organizations gain clear visibility into their compliance posture.

Continuous Control Monitoring

Automation enables real-time tracking of changes to critical configurations, master data, and transactions. The system continuously evaluates control effectiveness by monitoring user activities, analyzing transaction patterns, and flagging potential violations. This shifts compliance from periodic assessments to ongoing assurance.

Access Governance Automation

Modern platforms streamline complex access management through automated workflows. Key capabilities include risk-aware access provisioning, systematic certification campaigns, and privileged access monitoring. The system enforces compliant access lifecycles from initial provisioning through regular reviews and eventual deprovisioning.

Transaction Analysis

Advanced analytics capabilities transform how organizations monitor financial activities. The system can analyze 100% of transactions rather than samples, quantify financial exposure from control violations, and identify unusual patterns that merit investigation. This comprehensive view helps prevent material misstatements while reducing audit effort.

Control Documentation and Evidence

Automation fundamentally changes compliance documentation through systematic evidence collection and retention. The platform maintains detailed audit trails of all control activities, user actions, and system changes. This creates a complete, readily accessible record for internal and external audit purposes.

Cross-System Integration

Modern compliance platforms integrate across complex application landscapes including ERP systems, cloud services, and custom applications. This provides unified visibility and consistent controls across the entire technology environment that supports financial reporting.

Automated Reporting and Dashboards

Real-time dashboards and automated reporting capabilities provide clear visibility into compliance status. The system generates detailed evidence of control effectiveness, quantifies risks and violations, and maintains comprehensive audit trails. This transforms the preparation and execution of compliance audits.

This comprehensive automation approach typically reduces compliance costs by up to 70% while improving control effectiveness. The key is selecting a platform that aligns closely with your organization’s specific risks, existing systems, and compliance requirements.

SOX Compliance: Is It Worth the Cost?

Establishing SOX compliance in an organization can be costly, especially for small and medium-sized businesses. If an organization is not legally required to be SOX compliant, it can avoid expenses related to compliance audits. However, implementing an effective risk management program and establishing internal controls – both ITGCs and business process controls according to best practices – may prove valuable from a long-term perspective.

SOX Compliance FAQs

What Are SOX Controls?

SOX controls are mechanisms or processes designed to ensure accuracy and integrity of the financial reporting.

What Are the SOX Key Controls?

SOX key controls are related directly to protecting the integrity of financial reporting, while non-key controls are supplementary in establishing a compliance regime. The key controls may vary depending on the organization’s operational nature; however, access governance, data security and integrity, financial transaction reviews and approvals, and audit trails are normally considered key controls, while change management, business continuity (non-financial information backups and recovery procedures), physical security, IT systems maintenance, and compliance training programs are typically seen as non-key controls.

Why Did Congress Pass SOX?

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted to safeguard investors from fraudulent financial reporting practices and to ensure transparent and accurate disclosure of companies’ financial information.

What Are SOX Non-Compliance Penalties?

Penalties for non-compliance may include multimillion-dollar fines, stock exchange delisting, criminal charges, and imprisonment for executives, depending on the severity of violations.

How Does the SOX Act Apply to Employee Protection for Filing a Claim?

There are two sections of SOX dealing with whistleblower protection. Section 806 specifically protects employees of public companies, while Section 1107 establishes criminal penalties for retaliation against any person providing truthful information to law enforcement agencies.

What Are the Key Requirements of SOX Compliance?

SOX requires companies to establish and maintain internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR), obtain certifications from CEOs and CFOs attesting to the accuracy of financial statements, undergo external audits of both financial statements and internal controls, and retain all audit records and related documentation for seven years.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

How Often Should You Perform PeopleSoft User Access Reviews And Why

PeopleSoft teams often face threats caused by excess privilege, malicious insiders, and access misuse. Most of these can be mitigated with internal policies and periodic user access reviews. These reviews are critical when PeopleSoft users transition to new roles, employees offboard, or new people join the organization and are assigned specific roles. Often, the previous roles in the system remain intact, and these unused roles, access, and authorizations may potentially result in security and business risks. Companies are realizing the importance of PeopleSoft user access reviews to prevent such threats and are deploying automated solutions.

How Often Do You Need User Access Reviews In PeopleSoft?

When it comes to user access and roles, PeopleSoft applications often fail to eliminate inactive accounts of employees who have been transferred to different roles or left the organization. Periodic reviews help identify redundant access and authorizations that could otherwise lead to exposed vulnerabilities. Let’s take a look at different scenarios that determine the importance of routine user access reviews:

Annual reviews: The most common practice is to conduct a company-wide access review only once a year as it is time and resource-intensive. These reviews confirm that an organization has adequate controls to prevent unauthorized access to critical PeopleSoft data and transactions.

Bi-annual reviews: These user access reviews are typically for compliance purposes. These are an integral part of successful access governance and implementing the principle of least privilege. During these reviews, multiple audit policies and rules are evaluated that could lead to compliance violations in PeopleSoft applications.

Quarterly reviews: These are typically meant for IT-based roles and permissions. Quarterly reviews may include but are not always limited to:

Understanding access-level activities
Validating policies and generating policies based on access activity
Monitoring activity trails

Monthly reviews: If your organization has solutions deployed to detect access-related risks (e.g., SoD violations, sensitive access, etc.), it is recommended to perform monthly user access reviews where critical risks are identified. This helps strengthen internal controls and prevents role conflicts.

Year-round reviews: While working with global teams, you may perform PeopleSoft user access reviews at different times of the year based on the geographical location.

6 Benefits Of Regular User Access Reviews In PeopleSoft

Organizations leveraging the right set of automated solutions can perform these reviews regularly and reap the following benefits:

1. SoD Conflict Elimination:

Granting unnecessary access is one of the leading causes of SoD conflicts in PeopleSoft and puts your organization at risk for potential fraud. Frequent user access reviews help strengthen SoD controls, and multiple security tests ensure there are no conflicts.

2. Improving Data Security:

Frequent user access reviews in PeopleSoft, combined with periodic role clean-ups, allow or restrict actions such as report and query exports based on the context of user access.

3. Strengthen Data Privacy Measures:

Routine access reviews alongside adopting Attribute-Based Access Controls (ABAC) can enable automation of policy enforcement into access controls and prevent violation of policy requirements.

4. Prevents Privileged Access Abuse:

Periodic reviews help track all the user access data points to identify off-peak access, unknown IP address access, and access from unknown locations. This helps prevent privileged access misuse in PeopleSoft.

5. Enables Audit-Readiness:

Routine user access reviews can help streamline access request workflows, mitigate access risks, capture a complete audit trail of access requests and approvals in advance and make your teams audit-ready.

6. Reduces Manual Effort & Complexity:

Automating role and access reviews eliminate the need for manual reporting and investigation of false positives. This further helps with automated analysis across multiple platforms.

How Appsian Helps PeopleSoft Customers With User Access Reviews

Appsian’s automated solution helps PeopleSoft customers significantly reduce the time taken for user access reviews. Here’s how we help them improve efficiency while improving data security and privacy:

Behavioral Profiling: Appsian learns and displays actual usage of all roles, helping managers determine the necessity of each role and user access. This helps analyze unused roles and user access and detect deviations indicating potential fraud in real time.

Cost Optimization: Automating the PeopleSoft user access review and certification process significantly reduces overhead costs and human error risks.

Audit-Readiness: Appsian enables customers to meet auditor requirements with well-documented control processes. By reducing manual work, we help internal auditors to focus on more high-risk authorization access and other security risks.

Schedule a demo with our experts to make your user access reviews more efficient.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

7 Benefits Of Automating User Access Reviews In PeopleSoft

When PeopleSoft users transition to different roles or offboard, their previous roles and accounts in the system often remain intact. These unused roles and authorizations could potentially lead to business and security risks (e.g., compromised credentials). Role clean-ups and user access reviews in PeopleSoft play a significant role in preventing data security threats and Segregation of Duty (SoD) violations. This prepares organizations to adopt automation solutions that can assess risks and violations based on current authorizations and the actual usage of a particular role or account in PeopleSoft applications.

Challenges With User Access & Roles In PeopleSoft

Traditional PeopleSoft application capabilities do not produce the required level of granularity and visibility into how users access and engage with data. When it comes to reviewing user access and roles, PeopleSoft applications often fail to purge inactive accounts of employees who have offboarded or shifted to a different role or account. These redundant accounts often lead to exposed vulnerabilities and pose a threat to data security.

Companies need automated solutions to conduct periodic user access reviews in PeopleSoft that confirm the presence of adequate controls to restrict access to sensitive transactions and data.

7 Key Benefits Of Automating PeopleSoft User Access Reviews

PeopleSoft user access reviews are often labor-intensive and prone to human errors due to the vast amount of data that needs to be manually examined. Automating the access review process offers the following benefits to organizations:

1. SoD Conflict Elimination:
Granting more access than a user needs to save time is one of the leading causes of SoD conflicts in PeopleSoft and puts the organization at risk for potential fraud. Automating user access reviews helps strengthen SoD controls, and multiple security tests ensure there are no conflicts.

2. Improving Data Security Without Limiting Productivity:
Introducing “context” to user access determines “who” is authorized to access “what” PeopleSoft data, “when,” from which device, and “why.” User access reviews combined with periodic role clean-ups allow or restrict actions such as report and query exports based on the context of user access.

3. Strengthen Data Privacy Measures:
Traditional Role-Based Access Controls (RBAC) usually limit your ability to restrict user access to sensitive data fields and transactions. Companies adopting Attribute-Based Access Controls (ABAC) can enable automation of policy enforcement into their access controls and prevent violation of policy requirements.

4. Prevents Privileged Access Misuse:
Automating user access reviews for privileged accounts helps track all the user access data points to identify off-peak access, unknown IP address access, and access from strange locations. Enhanced access controls with dynamic authorization policies help prevent privileged access misuse in PeopleSoft.

5. Enables Audit-Readiness:
Organizations with automated user access reviews can streamline access request workflows, mitigate access risks, and capture a complete audit trail of access requests and approvals. This helps generate audit-ready reports for review by internal and external auditors with the least manual effort.

6. Reduced Manual Effort & Complexity:
Automating role and access reviews eliminate the need for manual reporting and investigation of false positives. This further helps with automated analysis across multiple platforms.

7. Emergency Access:
With automated reviews, organizations can further automate the release of access rights for emergency (firefighter) access, limiting the scope for a specific task, and revoking user access after custom-defined time frames.

How Appsian Helps PeopleSoft Customers Automate User Access Reviews

Appsian’s automated solution helps PeopleSoft customers reduce the time taken for user access reviews from months to hours. Here’s how we help them improve efficiency while bolstering data security and privacy:

Behavioral Profiling: Appsian learns and displays actual usage of all roles, helping managers determine the necessity of each role and user access. This helps analyze unused roles and user access, and detect deviations indicating potential fraud in real time.
Cost Optimization: Automating PeopleSoft user access review and certification process significantly reduce overhead costs and human error risks. Teams can simply manage these processes via a simple web browser without involving an expert.
Audit-Readiness: Appsian enables customers to meet auditor requirements with well-documented control processes. By reducing manual work to near zero, our solution allows internal auditors to focus on more high-risk authorization access and other potential security risks.
Intelligent Automation: This helps detect SoD conflicts, sensitive access, and potential policy violations for existing PeopleSoft users through business-oriented rules mapped to specific applications’ authorization models.

Schedule a demo with our experts to make your user access reviews a seamless process.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

8 Critical Success Factors For Achieving Audit-Readiness In PeopleSoft

Maintaining a state of audit readiness has become more critical than ever for organizations using PeopleSoft and other ERP systems in general. Today’s complex business environments, combined with the constantly increasing number of compliance regulations, require the audit to be dynamic, adaptable, and insightful to meet changing needs and expectations of investors, consumers, and regulators.

Unfortunately, what’s missing for most organizations is the lack of effective internal controls and policies that leads to compliance loopholes exposed during audits. So, before a deep dive into the success factors that prepare PeopleSoft teams for audits, let’s take a look at the basics.

What Is An Audit? What Makes PeopleSoft Teams Audit-Ready?

An audit is an official examination by a third party (independent auditor) to verify an organization’s adherence to reporting requirements (e.g., financial, operational, compliance, security, etc.). This verification is achieved by an auditor’s opinion on whether the entity’s reports are accurate and reliable. Typically, publicly traded companies, contractors to federal or state agencies, companies requiring bonds or insurance, private companies, and entities receiving government funding (e.g., universities, federal, state, and government agencies) undergo audits.

PeopleSoft teams should always log and monitor user activities to identify key risk indicators that could potentially lead to fraud. Establishing that your existing capabilities, internal controls, and policies are effective is the most significant step toward being audit-ready.

PeopleSoft Logging & Monitoring Are A Barrier To Audit-Readiness

When it comes to audits, PeopleSoft teams face certain challenges that make them unprepared for audits –

User activity information crucial to mitigating user-centric threats is often missing
Incident response for PeopleSoft is labor-intensive and time-consuming
Incomplete audit trail of application-level user activity
Auditing access and update activity require customization

Often, this brings to light some of the internal control deficiencies the organization being audited is grappling with, such as –

Ineffective Access Controls
Ineffective Data Field Level Controls
Ineffective Transaction Controls

The results produced by your business units, internal auditors, and external auditors will officially conclude if your internal controls and policies are effectively mitigating risks.

8 Key Factors To Set You Up For A Successful PeopleSoft Audit

PeopleSoft teams always need internal controls to effectively mitigate significant IT risks relevant to financial reporting in and around business systems. Listed below are some of the key success factors that help organizations minimize financial risks in terms of systems, transactions, and data.

Companies implementing ABAC can enable automation of policy enforcement into their access controls and prevent violation of policy requirements.
A risk-based approach to identifying and classifying PeopleSoft data helps improve regulatory compliance and reduces costs by eliminating unnecessary control measures.
An effective regulatory change management process helps PeopleSoft teams keep pace with new regulations and avoid ineffective policies and internal controls that lead to excessive compliance costs.
Your company should be able to monitor authorization usage and user activity in PeopleSoft to detect SoD violations in real-time.
An effective vulnerability detection and remediation program helps organizations understand security weaknesses, assess risk exposure, and implement policies and controls to reduce the possibilities of a breach.
Deploying a Common Control Framework across all applications minimizes the need for ineffective and manual controls that result in increased audit, risk, and compliance costs in PeopleSoft.
Implementing step-up MFA for sensitive PeopleSoft transactions adds preventative and detective controls at the transaction level. This helps security teams flag suspicious transaction activities by users and improve audit readiness.
To comply with regulatory and audit requirements, organizations need to understand their residual risk levels (residual risk = inherent risk – control effectiveness). Continuously monitoring these risk levels ensures the operating effectiveness of their internal controls and helps mitigate overall risk.

Ace Your Audits With Appsian’s PeopleSoft Capabilities

An investment in additional PeopleSoft capabilities such as logging, monitoring, and policy enforcement, among others, is an opportunity to improve your audit readiness. With the Appsian Security Platform, you can implement, verify, and maintain effective controls to achieve your annual financial statement and compliance audit requirements in a more cost-effective manner with the following features –

Adaptive Attribute-Based Access Controls to enable the enforcement of policy requirements into the access controls at the transaction and data level.
Multi-Factor Authentication at the login, transaction, and data field levels to minimize risk exposure.
Layered security, also known as defense-in-depth, protects against threats while incorporating compensating controls in the event of a control failure.
Periodic Control Assessments to validate the effectiveness of existing controls.
Continuous User Behavior Analysis to detect and report anomalies and threats.

Schedule a demo with our PeopleSoft experts to understand how you can implement effective controls and policies to stay audit-ready.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

3 Major Benefits of Implementing Automated User Provisioning For JD Edwards

Increased compliance regulations and the rising number of internal threats have forced organizations to tighten application access and adopt the principle of least privilege. However, when ERP applications like JD Edwards have thousands of users accessing them to perform their daily tasks, managing user access requests while adhering to compliance requirements can be challenging. The technical staff needs to put a considerable amount of time and effort into managing the provisioning process. And for auditors, providing audit reports showing appropriate approvals requires going through extensive paperwork. However, a majority of these problems can be solved through automated user provisioning. Here are three key areas where automation can significantly improve your JD Edwards provisioning process.

Streamlines User Provisioning With Configurable Workflows

Traditionally, granting access to JD Edwards users has been a manual process, with emails moving back and for between business owners and security/application admins. The large number of requests received by admins means there is little done in terms of manual checks. Essentially, the process is inefficient and allows risk to creep in due to overprovisioning. For auditors, this means going through volumes of paperwork to verify compliance and highlight risk.

However, automating your access provisioning process reduces much of the manual tasks, eliminates paperwork, and provides a streamlined process to grant access. An efficient provisioning solution allows you to tailor the workflow based on your company’s processes and hierarchy, with defined steps at each stage. Automation makes routine user and role administration and clean-up tasks faster. It also enables the setting up of a large number of users during implementation or acquisition projects.

Performs Segregation of Duties Checks Before Role Assignment

One of the biggest fallouts of manual user provisioning is over-provisioning, which leads to data security threats and increases the risk of fraud. Granting users new roles without checking for conflicts can provide users with more access than necessary. This could lead to segregation of duties violations and audit failures resulting in hefty fines.

This challenge can easily be overcome by deploying an automated user provisioning solution that also does SoD checks before granting roles. This allows approvers and admins to immediately identify SoD conflicts and program the process flow to allow or deny role assignments. Another significant benefit of automation is that the entire process is documented, providing a complete audit trail as evidence for your auditors.

Maintains a Detailed Audit Trail Of The Entire Process

Documenting and logging all access requests is a critical requirement for audit and compliance. However, tracking access changes through paperwork and tables is a tedious process. Not only does it increase the burden on your internal audit teams, but it also allows violations to go unnoticed. Apart from this, manual processes make it challenging for auditors to dig out information and provide evidence to external auditors.

Automation enables you to log all provisioning activity with a date and time stamp, allowing you to see exactly who requested, approved, and assigned what and when. This provides evidence for auditors who are testing that role assignments are authorized appropriately. It also provides evidence for internal inquiries or escalations if incorrect roles are assigned or if people perceive that undue delays have occurred.

Automated User Provisioning With Appsian

Appsian’s User Admin Manager (UAM) is an automated user provisioning solution that provides a configurable workflow that automates the process of requesting, approving, and provisioning roles, reducing the workload and paperwork involved. In addition, it can prevent unintended SoD violations by checking for conflicts before roles are assigned and keeps a full audit trail as evidence for auditors.

Download the Appsian User Admin Manager Data Sheet to learn how automation can simplify your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne user provisioning process and help you achieve better compliance.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

How to Simplify Your JD Edwards Access Reviews

What is a Periodic Access Review?

Access review or recertification is an IT General Control procedure that involves auditing all user access roles, privileges, and combinations of roles to determine if they are correct and adhere to the organization’s internal policies and compliance regulations. Most organizations only perform this audit of user access once a year, although some may review their high privileged user accounts more frequently. From a compliance point of view, it is critical for organizations to provide JD Edwards users with the least amount of access required to perform their tasks and that existing roles do not create conflicts that could lead to fraud or financial misinformation. This makes access reviews a key activity to mitigate risk, prevent fraud, and meet compliance.

Why JD Edwards Access Reviews Are Important

Most business applications have a role-based access control (RBAC) security model to assign roles and authorizations. However, JD Edwards user roles pose a specific problem when it comes to access reviews. Within JD Edwards (JDE), multiple roles assigned to a single user can be viewed in the “sequence manager.” But there is a known issue associated with this.

The permissions of roles higher in the sequence will take priority over the permission of roles lower in the sequence. Unfortunately, this means JD Edwards customers can end up with unexpected access results when granting multiple JDE roles to a user. This is one of the many RBAC issues that necessitate a third-party security solution to assist in managing this type of “inherited permission risk.”

The assignment of multiple roles in any business application requires thorough testing to effectively manage the inherited permission risks. Unfortunately, most business applications, including JD Edwards, lack effective access testing across multiple roles. Periodic access reviews help identify such roles and provide business managers with the necessary information to de-provision or segregate users to mitigate risk and prevent fraud.

Simplify JD Edwards Access Reviews with Automation

While most organizations conduct access reviews at least once a year, it is usually a time-consuming manual process where security and compliance teams have to constantly initiate the process and continuously follow up with the business manager to fill in their review sheets. At the end of the review, business managers have to wade through volumes of unintelligible data and try to get any meaningful information to sign it off.

However, an automated access review solution can take away a majority of the manual work required to administer the reviews and provide data in organized reports that are easy to comprehend and draw insights from. Some of the benefits of deploying an automated review solution include:

Easy to Execute: Automation simplifies and accelerates the review process and provides accurate, intelligible information. Once you identify the business owners who are responsible for carrying out the reviews and set them up as approvers, they can be automatically notified when a review has been initiated, and they will be required to review all the items that affect their role(s).

Maintains Audit Trail: JD Edwards users can accept or reject the changes and provide an explanation for their decision within the review tool. This ensures that a complete audit trail is maintained, showing who approved/rejected what and when. Users can also use filters to check which reviews are pending and complete them on time.

Reports to Satisfy Auditors: Instead of maintaining data on spreadsheets, making it extremely difficult for internal and external auditors to check for compliance violations, an automated solution shows complete information, including current and previous values and who approved them. This helps you quickly access the required information and provide answers to external auditors.

Automate Your Access Review with Appsian

Appsian helps organizations consolidate the access review process for all their business systems into one centralized point. This ensures consistent performance across all business applications to increase efficiency and lower your costs. Appsian’s automated access review solution enables you to produce review reports with the touch of a button and present business managers with clear information that they can easily understand and review. The solution also captures data on approvals, rejections, and explanatory notes directly into your JD Edwards system, allowing you to quickly and easily produce evidence for your auditors whenever needed.

Download the Appsian Periodic Access Review Data Sheet to learn how you can save time, effort, and cost by automating your JD Edwards user access reviews.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

3 Key Steps To Prevent Fraud In Your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne

When you have a few hundred or maybe thousands of users logging into your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications – many of them handling critical financial data and transactions – fraud prevention measures are necessary. Here are three key steps you can implement to identify and prevent fraud in your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications.

Step 1: Identify The Gaps In Your JD Edwards Security

Securing your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne applications can be complex, especially since there are multiple routes by which users can access these applications. To prevent fraud and enhance security, you need to know what exactly users can access and the authorizations they possess.

So, the first step is to gain a complete view of all the users, the roles assigned to each user, the authorizations associated with individual roles, and how these authorizations are being used. Analyzing this information enables you to identify vulnerabilities created, overprovisioning, access risks, and compliance gaps.

Step 2: Implement And Maintain Segregation Of Duties (SoD)

Once you have a complete view of access and authorizations, the next step in preventing fraud is to have a detailed SoD policy in place. Segregation of Duties allows you to break down your workflow and implement checks at critical stages to prevent fraud. It decentralizes the power of approvals to ensure authorizations cannot be misused with malicious intent or for personal gain.

Once SoD has been implemented within your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne environment, running regular audit reports to identify users with access rights that violate your SoD policy is a crucial step. Since user roles keep changing over time, regular SoD audits enable you to maintain compliance. Where SoD conflicts are found, your internal audit team has to drill down to investigate and remediate the issues or, if appropriate, apply fully documented mitigating controls.

Step 3: Ensure That Your Reporting Is Current And Accurate

Reporting is an important part of any audit. Reports enable you to analyze data, gain insights, monitor progress, and provide evidence. However, using spreadsheets and manual checks is cumbersome and time-consuming. In addition, spreadsheets are notoriously prone to error, making them unreliable. Also, any changes made within spreadsheets can’t be audited.

An effective reporting tool enables you to slice and dice results for easier analysis, prioritization, and remediation. It also records changes in real-time and takes into account any SoD mitigations, thereby avoiding false positives. Lastly, detailed reports provide auditors with the evidence they need to prove compliance.

JD Edwards EnterpriseOne Fraud Prevention With Appsian

Segregation of Duties (SoD) controls are an important tool to prevent fraudulent activity or satisfy auditors’ demands. Unfortunately, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne contains no native functionality to help manage SoD or facilitate compliance reporting.

Appsian’s Audit Manager enables you to maintain an SoD model within the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne environment and runs regular checks to identify users with access permissions that might violate your SoD policy. It provides the ability to drill down to investigate any SoD conflict issue and remediate it with accurate information or, if appropriate, apply fully documented mitigating controls.

Download the Appsian Audit Manager datasheet to learn how you can control key fraud risks within your JD Edwards EnterpriseOne environment.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

How to Detect PeopleSoft Security Threats with Real-Time Analytics

PeopleSoft applications process and store vast amounts of customer, employee, and financial data that are constantly accessed by an increasing number of users from various locations, devices, and network connections. These dynamic access requirements make detecting PeopleSoft security threats a significant challenge. Unfortunately, PeopleSoft has static security controls and manual reporting, creating blind spots that result in security and compliance gaps.

In this Appsian solution demo, you’ll learn how to detect PeopleSoft security threats such as brute force attacks and logins from multiple IP addresses with Real-Time Analytics.

An inconvenient truth is that PeopleSoft logging capabilities are inadequate for meeting today’s dynamic security requirements. Appsian uses an in-depth understanding of PeopleSoft logging to capture granular, real-time information on who a user is, what they’re trying to access, and where they’re coming from.

Appsian’s real-time analytics platform, Appsian360, correlates and translates this unstructured log activity into actionable information. Equipping you with real-time visualized dashboards to quickly spot PeopleSoft security threats and other suspicious activity and drill down to root out issues.

Here’s a specific example from an organization that used Appsian360 to detect and respond to a brute force attack. They had just put changes into production the night before and detected that they were being hit with 3,500 logins a minute. At first, they thought they broke the system and were preparing to roll the project out of projection. Fortunately, they could quickly track down the IP addresses originating the attack and block them on the external firewall.

Appsian captured and displayed the appropriate data so the company could understand the problem and respond with the proper steps to effectively resolve the issue in a very short period of time.

Contact us today to learn how we can help you take a contextual, granular-level approach to secure your PeopleSoft environment. And enable you to detect and respond to PeopleSoft security threats such as brute force attacks, logins from multiple IP addresses, and many more.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Schedule Your Demonstration and see how the Appsian Security Platform can be tailored to your organization’s unique objectives

Request a Demo

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.

Necessary

Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

Functional

Performance

Analytics

Others

Platforms

Features

Register for an Upcoming Webinar

SAP

PeopleSoft

Appsian360

Review

Webinars

Persona

Register for an Upcoming Webinar

Customers

Video Testimonials

Featured Case Studies

Why Appsian

Management Team

Careers

Press Releases

Partners

Contact Us

Customers

Partners

Home / Blog / What is Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) Section 404?

What is Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) Section 404?

What is Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) Section 404?

What is SOX 404?

Section 404(a)

Section 404(b)

Section 404(c)

The Purpose and Scope of SOX 404

Key Requirements of SOX Section 404

Management Responsibility:

Internal Control Report:

Auditor’s Attestation:

Documentation:

Annual Assessment:

Addressing Deficiencies:

Challenges of SOX 404 Compliance

Steps to SOX 404 Compliance

Identification:

Design and Documentation

Implementation

Monitoring:

Benefits of SOX 404 Compliance

Automating SOX 404 Compliance

Conclusion

Related Articles.

Put the Appsian Security Platform to the Test

Home / Blog / Comprehensive Guide to SOX Compliance

Comprehensive Guide to SOX Compliance

What is the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act?

What is SOX compliance?

History of SOX

Why SOX Compliance Matters

Overview of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

Key Provisions of SOX

Creating the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)

Strengthening Financial Reporting Requirements

Making Corporate Executives Personally Responsible for Financial Disclosures and Controls

Increasing Independence for External Auditors and Analysts

Protecting Whistleblowers

Who Must Comply with SOX?

Private Companies and Non-profit Organizations

Accounting Companies

Key SOX Compliance Requirements

Filing Accurate Financial Reports Certified by Corporate Executives

Implementing Appropriate Internal Controls

Business Process Controls

IT Controls

Real-Time Disclosure of Financial Changes

Passing Regular Audits

SOX Compliance Benefits

Financial Stewardship

Improved Reporting

Enhanced Cybersecurity

Better Collaboration

Risk Prioritization

Challenges of SOX Compliance

SOX Key Sections

Section 302: Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports

Section 303: Improper Influence on Conduct of Audits

Register
for an Upcoming
Webinar

Register
for an Upcoming
Webinar