Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
09/06/2026 11:31 pm
TL;DR: IGA programs still struggle when group hygiene, compliance enforcement, and time-bound access are treated as separate tasks rather than one lifecycle problem, according to Netwrix’s on-demand webinar, which argues that Directory Manager can streamline group requests, recertification, intelligent group assignment, and temporary memberships across existing identity platforms, positioning directory governance as a practical way to reduce helpdesk load and access clutter.
NHIMG editorial — here’s why we think this discussion matters
By the numbers:
- Only 44% of organisations have implemented any policies to manage their AI agents, despite 92% agreeing that governing AI agents is critical to enterprise security.
- Systems with least-privileged AI access had a 17% incident rate vs 76% for over-privileged systems.
- 69% of security leaders agree identity management must fundamentally shift to address agentic AI systems.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams manage temporary group memberships in IGA programs?
A: Security teams should treat temporary memberships as a control that must expire everywhere, not just in the directory.
Q: Why do unused directory groups create governance risk?
A: Unused groups create governance risk because they preserve old access logic, confuse reviewers, and hide privilege that no longer matches business need.
Practitioner guidance
- Map group ownership to business purpose Require every directory group to have a named owner and a documented business purpose before it can be used for access assignment or recertification.
- Convert standing memberships into temporary access where feasible Use time-bound memberships for access that does not need to persist beyond a task, then verify that expiry propagates to all connected applications and not just the directory record.
- Recertify groups before recertifying members First validate that the group itself still serves a real function, then review membership against that purpose.
What to expect at the briefing
Netwrix's full webinar covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- How Directory Manager structures group membership requests and approvals in day-to-day IGA workflows
- The recertification workflow for identifying and cleaning up unused groups before they become audit noise
- How temporary memberships are configured to reduce over-privilege without breaking operational access
- The practical integration points with identity platforms that matter during implementation, not just planning
👉 Watch Netwrix's on-demand webinar on Directory Manager for IGA and group governance →
Directory group governance: what does it change for IAM teams?
Explore further
10/06/2026 1:53 am
Directory group sprawl is a governance failure, not a hygiene nuisance. Once groups become the default way to express access, they accumulate business logic, exceptions, and stale membership that no one fully owns. That turns the directory into the control plane for entitlement drift across human, NHI, and adjacent automation use cases. Practitioners should treat group design as an access governance boundary, not a cleanup task.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 69% of security leaders agree identity management must fundamentally shift to address agentic AI systems, according to the 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
- The same survey found that 70% of organisations grant AI systems more access than they would give a human employee performing the exact same job.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How do organisations know whether temporary access is actually working?
A: Temporary access is working only when expiry is enforced in the directory and the effective entitlement disappears from every system that consumes it. The main signal is not the policy setting but the removal outcome. If access remains usable after expiry, the control is cosmetic rather than operational.
👉 Read our full editorial: Directory group governance and temporary access gaps in IGA
