Which sub workflows would be achieve this requirement?

Ranjith2000 · August 29, 2023, 5:40pm

Hi All,

i need to restrict the request when the user raising the entitlement and it will check that entitlement belongs to abc application so if user have a account in abc application then that request will allow . if the user dont have the application link then block him saying "please raise request for “Role A” and get the account created.

i have tried in advance policy but it didnt work so now im trying to achieve this requirement in LCM Provisioning

my doubt is which sub workflows we can achieve this . iam thinking i need to write a logic in Identity Request Violation Review

can anyone help this

Thanks,
Ranjith Murugan

Jarin_James · August 29, 2023, 7:19pm

Hi @Ranjith2000,

The Policy works in conjunction with LCM Provisioning workflow when raising request.
Check the variables in the LCM workflow,

policyScheme
policiesToCheck
allowRequestsWithViolations

Remold · August 29, 2023, 9:28pm

Using a policy is the way to go IMHO. It is much simpler, cleaner and no need to change OOTB workflows

With the Remediation Action you can state what needs to be done (please raise request for “Role A”).

Can you state what you tried with the advanced policy and what issues you faced?

– Remold

Ranjith2000 · August 30, 2023, 2:02pm

Hi @Jarin_James @Jarin_James

import sailpoint.object.*; 
import java.util.*; 
import java.text.*; 
import org.apache.log4j.Logger;   
import org.apache.log4j.Level; 
PolicyViolation violation = null;
boolean raisePaRequest=false;  
	  
if ( plan != null ) {

    //List accounts = plan.getAccountRequests();
	log.error("emtering list "+ accounts);
    if ( ( accounts != null ) && ( accounts.size() > 0 ) ) {
    for ( AccountRequest accountRequest : plan.getAccountRequests()){
	String appNAme=accountRequest.getApplicationName();
	String operation=accountRequest.getOperation();
	if(appNAme.equalsIgnoreCase("AD Account") && operation.equalsIgnoreCase("Create") )
	{
	 raisePaRequest = true;
	 }
	 }
	 }
	 }
	 if (raisePaRequest) {
            String blockingMsg = "You cannot request Application Name Entitlement without Application Name";    

            violation = new PolicyViolation();
            violation.setActive(true);
            violation.setIdentity(identity);
            violation.setPolicy(policy);
            constraint.setName(blockingMsg);
            violation.setConstraint(constraint);
            violation.setDescription(blockingMsg);
            violation.setStatus(sailpoint.object.PolicyViolation.Status.Open);
        }
    return violation;

this is rule which i was trying in lcm provsioning but which subprocess i need to put into this rule

can anyone please help this

Thanks
Ranjith

Jarin_James · September 1, 2023, 5:50am

HI @Ranjith2000

Just to clarify your requirement,
It is to check whether the user have raised request for AcctsPayable entitlement in finance app. If the user doesn’t have an account for FInance App before this request, it should block him showing the below message.
“Please raise request for Role A and get Active Directory Account created”

Ranjith2000 · September 1, 2023, 6:09am

Hi @Jarin_James

yes exactly that is my requirement ,
It is to check whether the user have raised request for AcctsPayable entitlement in finance app . If the user doesn’t have an account for FInance App before this request, it should block him showing the below message.

sorry that violation meseages " “Please raise request for Role A and get finance app Account created”

Jarin_James · September 1, 2023, 9:43am

Hi @Ranjith2000

You try below code snippet for Advanced Policy

import java.util.List;
import java.util.Locale;

import sailpoint.api.IdentityService;
import sailpoint.api.SailPointContext;
import sailpoint.object.Application;
import sailpoint.object.Entitlement;
import sailpoint.object.GenericConstraint;
import sailpoint.object.Identity;
import sailpoint.object.Link;
import sailpoint.object.Policy;
import sailpoint.object.PolicyViolation;
import sailpoint.tools.GeneralException;

  private String policyMessage = "Please raise request for Role A and get finance app Account created";
  String applicationName = "finance app";
  String entitlementValue = "AcctsPayable";

  public PolicyViolation generatePolicyViolation(Identity identity, Policy policy, GenericConstraint constraint, String policyDescrptn) {
    PolicyViolation policyViolation = new PolicyViolation();
    policyViolation.setActive(true);
    policyViolation.setIdentity(identity);
    policyViolation.setPolicy(policy);
    policyViolation.setConstraint(constraint);
    policyViolation.setDescription(policyDescrptn);
    policyViolation.setStatus(sailpoint.object.PolicyViolation.Status.Open);
    return policyViolation;
  }

  public List fetchIdentityEnt(Identity identity, String applicationName) {
    List applicationLinks = identity.getLinks();
    List entitlementList = null;
    if(applicationLinks != null && applicationLinks.size() > 0) {
      for (Link singleIdentityLink : applicationLinks) {
        if (applicationName.equals(singleIdentityLink.getApplicationName())) {
          try {
            entitlementList = singleIdentityLink.getEntitlements(Locale.getDefault(), "");
          } catch (GeneralException e) {
            log.error("The Error is: " + e);
          }
        }
      }
    }
    return entitlementList;
  }

  public boolean isPolicyViolated(Identity identity) throws GeneralException {
    log.debug("Entering isPolicyViolated");
    boolean isPolicyViolated = false;
    boolean entitlementExist = false;
    boolean linkExist = false;
    String name = identity.getName();
    log.debug("name = "+ name);
    Identity oldIdentity = context.getObjectByName(Identity.class,name);
    log.debug("oldIdentity = "+ oldIdentity);
    Application application = context.getObjectByName(Application.class, applicationName);
    IdentityService identityService = new IdentityService(context);
    if(oldIdentity != null){
      List links = identityService.getLinks(oldIdentity, application);
      log.debug("links = "+ links.size());
      if(!links.isEmpty()){
        linkExist = true;
      }
    }
    List entitlementList = fetchIdentityEnt(identity, applicationName);
    log.debug("entitlementList = "+ entitlementList);
    if(entitlementList != null){
      for(Entitlement entitlement : entitlementList){
        if(entitlement.getAttributeValue().equals(entitlementValue)){
            entitlementExist = true;
            break;
        }
      }
    }

    log.debug("linkExist = "+ linkExist);
    log.debug("entitlementExist = "+ entitlementExist);
    if(!linkExist && entitlementExist){
        isPolicyViolated = true;
    }
    log.debug("isPolicyViolated = "+ isPolicyViolated);
    log.debug("Exiting isPolicyViolated");
    return isPolicyViolated;
  }


  log.debug("*****************Inside Finance App Policy Violation Rule***********************");
  boolean isPolicyViolated = false;
  PolicyViolation appPolicyViolation = null;
  List entitlementList = fetchIdentityEnt(identity,applicationName);
  try {
    if (identity != null) {
      isPolicyViolated = isPolicyViolated(identity);
    }
    if (isPolicyViolated) {
          appPolicyViolation = generatePolicyViolation(identity, policy, constraint, policyMessage);
    }
  } catch (GeneralException e) {
      log.error("General Exception " + e);
  }

  log.debug("appPolicyViolation = "+ appPolicyViolation);
  return appPolicyViolation;

This should throw the user with Violation. I have tested with a different application, and it is working.
Make sure to update the Application Name and entitlement value variables in the snippet

Update the Rule summary with the desired message;

Ranjith2000 · September 1, 2023, 11:04am

Thanks you So Much @Jarin_James this rule was perfectly working for my requirement

The_IAMSheriff · October 23, 2023, 6:58pm

Hi @Jarin_James,

Greetings! I would like to ask a query on your valuable response on advanced policy, hope you don’t mind.

What could be the reason I am not getting the block message displayed in “Manage User Access” while submitting the request. Seems like I am getting an detective policy instead. When simulation ran the count of violations where not zero. We are using IIQ.8.3.

Jarin_James · October 25, 2023, 9:12am

Hi @The_IAMSheriff,

Can you check the policyScheme Variable in LCM Provisioning Workflow. It shouldn’t be disabled and should be interactive to allow the requestor to remove the request.

The_IAMSheriff · October 30, 2023, 11:17am

Seems like it, thank you Jarin.

system · December 29, 2023, 11:18am

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

Topic		Replies	Views
Advanced Policy Violation Rule IIQ Community Knowledge Base identityiq	21	1914	November 11, 2025
How should i get the users selected entitlement in advanced policies? IIQ Discussion and Questions identityiq	6	1273	November 20, 2023
Is there anyway to skip account provisioning for few entitlements and allow provisioning for other IIQ Discussion and Questions rules , identityiq , provisioning , entitlements	23	836	August 28, 2024
Stop the user to raising the specific role Access Request when user is not having Entra account IIQ Discussion and Questions identityiq	7	100	February 9, 2025
How should i get the users selected entitlement in policies? IIQ Discussion and Questions rules , identityiq , entitlements	9	904	August 14, 2023

Which sub workflows would be achieve this requirement?

Related topics