User Acccount

[rishabhnilk]

Hi everyone, I'm currently learning ServiceNow and had a quick question.
In real-time projects, is it considered a valid use case to create a duplicate user record in a separate custom table once the user account is deactivated?
The goal is to maintain those deactivated user records separately for audit or reporting purposes.
Is this something commonly implemented in actual projects?

Thanks in advance for your insights

[Nikhil Bajaj9 · Accepted solution]

Hi @rishabhnilk ,

No CUstom table will be created or involved. Only in same User table [sys_user], we will mark Active= false [Active checkbox unchecked from the user form]. so data will be in same table only with Active= True (Active users) and Active = false (Inactive users). It works like this only in rela time projects.

If you have any furtehr question, you can ask me and if my answer helped you in anyways, mark it- Solution accepted.

Regards,

Nikhil Bajaj

[Chaitanya ILCR · Accepted solution]

Hi @rishabhnilk ,

in addition to what others have mentioned

you can enable auditing on sys_user table to see when and who has updated what on the user record

in this scenario of yours

if auditing is enabled you can check when the user is made inactive and who has made it 

to enable auditing to you can go Dictionaries and filter with table name and type = collection and update the audit checkbox to true

only the changes made after this step will be audited 

https://www.servicenow.com/docs/bundle/yokohama-platform-security/page/administer/security/task/t_En...

Please mark my answer as helpful/correct if it resolves your query.

Regards,
Chaitanya

[Viraj Hudlikar · Accepted solution]

Hello @rishabhnilk 

In most real-time ServiceNow projects, we don’t create a separate table for inactive users. We simply set the Active field to false in the existing sys_user table. This way, you still have the user data, and it’s easy to report or audit.

If you need to track changes, you can enable auditing on the sys_user table to see who deactivated a user and when.

If my response has helped you hit helpful button and if your concern is solved do mark my response as correct.

Thanks & Regards
Viraj Hudlikar.

[Simon Hendery]

Hi @rishabhnilk 

No, that's not necessary. All you need to do is set the Active field in the sys_user table to false when a user is deactivated.

[Nikhil Bajaj9 · Accepted solution]

Hi @rishabhnilk ,

No CUstom table will be created or involved. Only in same User table [sys_user], we will mark Active= false [Active checkbox unchecked from the user form]. so data will be in same table only with Active= True (Active users) and Active = false (Inactive users). It works like this only in rela time projects.

If you have any furtehr question, you can ask me and if my answer helped you in anyways, mark it- Solution accepted.

Regards,

Nikhil Bajaj

[Chaitanya ILCR · Accepted solution]

Hi @rishabhnilk ,

in addition to what others have mentioned

you can enable auditing on sys_user table to see when and who has updated what on the user record

in this scenario of yours

if auditing is enabled you can check when the user is made inactive and who has made it 

to enable auditing to you can go Dictionaries and filter with table name and type = collection and update the audit checkbox to true

only the changes made after this step will be audited 

https://www.servicenow.com/docs/bundle/yokohama-platform-security/page/administer/security/task/t_En...

Please mark my answer as helpful/correct if it resolves your query.

Regards,
Chaitanya

[Viraj Hudlikar · Accepted solution]

Hello @rishabhnilk 

In most real-time ServiceNow projects, we don’t create a separate table for inactive users. We simply set the Active field to false in the existing sys_user table. This way, you still have the user data, and it’s easy to report or audit.

If you need to track changes, you can enable auditing on the sys_user table to see who deactivated a user and when.

If my response has helped you hit helpful button and if your concern is solved do mark my response as correct.

Thanks & Regards
Viraj Hudlikar.