Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
11/07/2026 8:38 pm
TL;DR: Cloud privileged access management is positioned as the answer to protecting critical accounts in cloud environments, where identity sprawl, limited visibility, and Shadow IT make control harder than in on-premises models, according to Soffid. The real issue is not simply more security tooling, but governance that can preserve operational flexibility while constraining privileged access.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Soffid: Cloud Privileged Access Management: Protecting sensitive accounts in the Cloud
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.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams govern privileged access in cloud environments?
A: Security teams should govern cloud privilege by identity type, task scope, and ownership, not by tenancy alone.
Q: Why do cloud environments make privileged access harder to control?
A: Cloud environments multiply identity paths through consoles, APIs, integrations, and remote operations.
Q: What breaks when privileged cloud accounts are shared across teams?
A: Shared privileged accounts break attribution, weaken accountability, and make access reviews largely ceremonial.
Practitioner guidance
- Inventory every privileged cloud identity Build a complete register of administrative users, service accounts, and cloud-native privileged roles across every tenant and account.
- Remove shared privileged accounts Replace shared admin logins with named identities and separate elevation paths for each operator.
- Tie Cloud PAM to continuous discovery Combine access governance with cloud asset and identity discovery so unmanaged tools, accounts, and integrations are surfaced before they become standing risk.
What's in the full article
Soffid's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- How Soffid frames Cloud PAM for cloud-hosted administrative accounts and sensitive assets.
- The product-specific view of how privileged access is controlled across shared network environments.
- The vendor's discussion of scalability, automatic updates, and cloud deployment convenience.
- Examples of the cloud migration challenges Soffid says its modular platform is designed to address.
👉 Read Soffid's analysis of cloud privileged access management →
Cloud privileged access management: what IAM teams need to change?
Explore further
11/07/2026 9:06 pm
Cloud privilege is really an identity governance problem, not a hosting problem. The article focuses on cloud deployment, but the underlying issue is who can act with elevated authority and how that authority is governed across changing environments. Cloud platforms increase identity volume and shorten administrative distance, which means PAM must be treated as a lifecycle and accountability discipline rather than a static control set. The implication is that cloud teams should measure privilege by actor type, not by infrastructure location.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 88.5% of organisations acknowledge that their non-human IAM practices lag behind or are merely on par with their human identity and access management efforts, according to The 2024 Non-Human Identity Security Report.
- Only 23.7% of organisations share secrets through insecure methods such as email or messaging applications, showing that visibility and handling practices still vary widely across NHI programmes.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should be accountable for Cloud PAM and Shadow IT risk?
A: Accountability should sit with the teams that own cloud operations, IAM, and platform governance together, because Shadow IT and privilege management overlap in the same control surface. If discovery is missing, PAM cannot be complete. If PAM is missing, discovery does not translate into reduced risk.
👉 Read our full editorial: Cloud privileged access management in the cloud needs tighter governance
