TL;DR: IT process automation tools can reduce manual work and improve consistency, but they also expand the number of machine-driven workflows that inherit secrets, service accounts, and access paths, according to Zluri. The real issue is not automation itself, but whether identity governance can keep pace with the non-human access behind it.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Zluri: “Top 14 IT Process Automation Tools To Try In 2026”.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams govern access when automation handles most requests?
A: Security teams should treat automation as the default execution path and build policy around exception handling, risk thresholds, and enforcement hooks.
Q: Why do AI tools create new identity governance risks for IAM teams?
A: AI tools create new identity governance risks because they combine fast adoption with broad access paths and subordinate permission objects.
Q: What breaks when workflow credentials can be used by someone other than the owner?
A: Ownership-based governance breaks because the person who created the credential is no longer the only actor who can exercise it.
Practitioner guidance
- Inventory automation-bearing identities Document every service account, API key, token, and certificate used by automation tools, then map each one to a named business owner and system owner.
- Tighten workflow-scoped privilege Limit each automation workflow to the smallest set of systems and actions it needs, and separate credentials by process rather than sharing them across teams.
- Bind offboarding to workflow retirement Remove non-human credentials when the automation use case ends, not when a periodic review eventually catches the stale access.
Bottom line: Automation tools are not just efficiency enablers. They also create identity-bearing workflows that can hide non-human access from ordinary governance processes.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →