Topic starter
24/06/2026 8:04 pm
TL;DR: CyberArk migrations can expand exposure when discovery, dependency mapping and account ownership are incomplete, according to Hydden, while Verizon’s 2025 DBIR and Microsoft both show stolen or password-based credentials remain a dominant breach path. The real control failure is not migration itself but blind governance over privileged accounts, service accounts and dependencies.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Hydden: “Accelerate Your Migration to CyberArk PAM”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when privileged access is not routed through PAM?
A: When privileged actions bypass PAM, organisations lose the controls that make elevation accountable.
Q: Why do incomplete dependency maps create risk during credential rotation?
A: Because many applications and services depend on credentials that are not obvious from the account record alone.
Q: How should organisations prioritise privileged accounts before migration?
A: Start with the accounts that combine high privilege, unclear ownership and active business dependency, then remove dormant or duplicate access before onboarding lower-risk accounts.
Practitioner guidance
- Build a complete privileged account inventory Scan Active Directory, cloud platforms, databases, applications and infrastructure for privileged accounts, service accounts and system credentials before defining migration scope.
- Map account dependencies to business services Document which applications, scripts and workflows depend on each credential so you can sequence vaulting and rotation without breaking production.
- Remove dormant and duplicate access first Decommission accounts that have no current business use, and consolidate duplicate credentials before onboarding active access into the target PAM model.
Bottom line: The main risk in a PAM migration is not the platform change itself but the lack of visibility into privileged accounts, their owners and their dependencies.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
25/06/2026 5:12 am
Migration visibility is the control, not a project step: This article is really about whether an organisation can see its privileged estate clearly enough to govern it. CyberArk migration becomes risky when discovery, ownership and dependency data are incomplete, because the target platform then inherits unknown access instead of eliminating it. The practitioner conclusion is simple: migration readiness is an identity governance test, not an implementation task.
A few things that frame the scale:
- Only 36% of health IT leaders say their organisation applies a privileged access strategy consistently across the enterprise, according to Ponemon Institute research.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between migrating privileged access and governing it properly?
A: Migration moves accounts into a new control plane. Governance proves which accounts are needed, who owns them, what they depend on and whether their privilege is still justified. A successful migration can still leave unmanaged exposure behind if visibility, ownership and lifecycle controls are weak.
👉 Read our full editorial: CyberArk migration visibility gaps are the real PAM risk