Provisioning

Display a warning when using outdated snapshots in Rule Mining
When running Rule Mining in HelloID Provisioning, it is currently not clear whether the selected target system is using an outdated snapshot. As a result, customers may unknowingly generate Rule Mining reports based on outdated data. This can lead to the creation of incorrect Business Rules, potentially resulting in users being assigned incorrect or unnecessary permissions. Since Rule Mining is used to analyze existing permissions and identify opportunities for automating access assignments, it is important that customers are aware of the freshness of the underlying data. Suggested improvement When selecting a target system in Rule Mining, HelloID should indicate whether the available snapshot might be outdated. Ideally, the interface would: Display the date and time when the snapshot was last generated. Show a clear warning when the snapshot is considered outdated. Recommend refreshing the snapshot before running Rule Mining. Optionally, provide a button or link to refresh the snapshot directly. Expected behavior When a customer selects a target system for Rule Mining, the interface should clearly communicate the age of the available snapshot. If the snapshot is outdated, a warning should inform the customer about the potential risks of using outdated data and recommend refreshing the snapshot before proceeding. Customers should be able to make an informed decision about whether to continue with the existing snapshot or refresh it first. Business value This improvement helps prevent Business Rules from being created based on outdated information, reducing the risk of incorrect permission assignments. It also increases transparency, improves the reliability of Rule Mining results, and helps customers make better-informed decisions when configuring automated access assignments.
0
Improve Rule Mining empty state for first-time users
When a (new) customer opens Rule Mining in HelloID Provisioning for the first time, without having generated a report previously, an error is displayed because no previous report can be loaded. The rest of the screen remains empty. Although this behavior is understandable from a technical perspective, it creates confusion for customers. There is no explanation of why the screen is empty or what steps are required to generate their first Rule Mining report. This can give customers the impression that Rule Mining is not working correctly, potentially discouraging them from exploring or using the functionality. Suggested improvement Instead of displaying an error and an empty screen when no previous report exists, show an informative empty-state placeholder. This placeholder could include: A short explanation that no Rule Mining report has been generated yet. Information about what Rule Mining does and how it can help customers. Clear instructions on how to configure and generate their first report. Optionally, a button or link that guides users directly to the relevant configuration or documentation. Expected behavior When a customer opens Rule Mining without an existing report, the interface should recognize this as a normal first-time scenario rather than presenting it as an error. An informative placeholder should guide customers through the initial setup and encourage them to start using Rule Mining. Business value Improving the first-time user experience will reduce confusion, make Rule Mining more accessible to new customers, and encourage adoption of the functionality. It also helps prevent unnecessary support questions caused by an error message that does not clearly explain what action the customer should take.
0
Add a condition to check for dependencies in other business rules
I'd like the ability to create a condition in Business Rules that allows a rule to be applied only when another Business Rule has already been applied to the same person. For example, some HR systems contain external users or interns who do not always require an account. In these cases, I can create a Business Rule for account provisioning that excludes external users. I can then create a separate Business Rule for exceptions, allowing specific external users who do require an account to be added manually. The challenge arises when I create a rule such as "Enable Accounts". This rule attempts to run for all users, including those who will never receive an account. As a result, many users appear in Actions with a status of "Waiting". To avoid this, I would need to create separate Business Rules for enabling accounts, assigning default rights, granting additional entitlements, and so on. This quickly increases the number of rules that need to be maintained. It also increases administrative complexity because any changes must be replicated across multiple Business Rules. By allowing a Business Rule to check whether a user has already been included in, or granted access through, another Business Rule, administrators could significantly reduce the number of required rules and the associated maintenance effort. This would simplify rule management, reduce administrative overhead, and prevent unnecessary pending actions for users who are not intended to receive accounts.
1
Load More
→