Topic starter
07/06/2026 9:05 pm
TL;DR: Legacy PAM can add complexity, cost, fragmented workflows, and weak JIT adoption in modern hybrid environments, making access harder to govern rather than easier, according to StrongDM. For IAM and NHI teams, the real issue is not feature count but whether access controls can keep pace with cloud-era operational demands.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by StrongDM: “CyberArk Privileged Access Management: 5 Critical Questions to Ask”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when legacy PAM adds too much operational friction?
A: When PAM adds too much friction, teams work around it with manual approvals, shared access paths, or persistent permissions.
Q: Why do fragmented PAM workflows increase access risk?
A: Fragmented workflows split entitlement data, session evidence, and approval records across tools, which makes it hard to know who has access and for how long.
Q: How do security teams know if just-in-time access is actually working?
A: Look for short-lived sessions, automatic revocation, and complete request-to-access logs.
Practitioner guidance
- Assess PAM workflow friction Map every privileged access request path from request to revocation and identify where users switch to manual or persistent access because the control is too cumbersome.
- Validate JIT displacement of standing access Sample cloud, SaaS, on-prem, and database access to confirm that just-in-time permissions are actually replacing persistent privilege rather than sitting beside it.
- Consolidate privilege inventory and governance data Unify entitlement records, approval history, and session evidence so recertification and exception handling are based on one coherent view of access.
Bottom line: Legacy PAM can become a governance burden when the access model no longer matches how modern environments are actually run.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
08/06/2026 8:52 am
Legacy PAM becomes a governance tax when the access model no longer matches the estate. CyberArk-style complexity is not just an implementation nuisance. It changes how often teams bypass controls, how consistently they adopt JIT, and how much confidence they can place in recertification outcomes. The practitioner conclusion is straightforward: if access governance slows the business more than it secures it, the programme is already operating below its intended control value.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should organisations prioritise simplifying PAM before adding more features?
A: Yes, when the current control plane is slowing adoption, driving exceptions, or increasing tool sprawl. A simpler access model is often more effective than a larger feature set because it improves consistent use, which is what turns policy into actual governance.
👉 Read our full editorial: CyberArk PAM creates complexity that slows modern access governance
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group