Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
25/06/2026 3:04 pm
TL;DR: Legacy IGA models struggle with deepfake-enabled fraud, privilege drift, machine identity sprawl, and fragmented audit evidence across hybrid environments, according to SafePaaS. Static roles and manual reviews no longer match the speed or shape of modern identity risk, so governance now has to be continuous, contextual, and operational.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by SafePaaS: Trends and Strategic Solutions for CISOs
By the numbers:
- More than 60% of breaches now result from compromised credentials via phishing, brute force, or privilege abuse.
- The Identity Defined Security Alliance reports that 94% of organizations have suffered a breach in the last two years.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams govern identity risk across humans and machine identities?
A: Treat both as part of the same governance fabric, but do not govern them identically.
Q: Why do static roles fail in modern identity governance programmes?
A: Static roles fail because business change is continuous and the role model is not.
Q: What do security teams get wrong about machine identity governance?
A: They often treat machine identities as technical artefacts instead of governed identities with owners, lifecycle rules, and revocation paths.
Practitioner guidance
- Collapse fragmented identity controls into one governance model Map human accounts, machine identities, privileged roles, and access review workflows into a single operating model so exceptions, approvals, and evidence do not live in separate tools.
- Inventory every machine identity with business ownership Build a live register of service accounts, API keys, tokens, and certificates, and require a named owner, purpose, and expiry condition for each one.
- Replace periodic reviews with continuous risk signals Feed privileged activity, SoD violations, and key risk indicators into workflow-driven remediation so access issues are flagged and resolved as they appear.
What's in the full article
SafePaaS's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- The full evaluation checklist for policy-based access controls, automated reviews, and real-time KRI dashboards
- The vendor's implementation framing for centralized IGA across hybrid and cloud environments
- Specific examples of how SafePaaS maps detection, prevention, remediation, and monitoring into one workflow
- Customer outcome examples showing how the platform claims to reduce review time and audit friction
👉 Read SafePaaS's guidance on risk-based identity governance for CISOs →
Identity governance in hybrid enterprise: what CISOs need now?
Explore further
25/06/2026 4:22 pm
Static identity governance is now a control assumption failure, not just a tooling gap. The article is right that fragmented IAM and IGA architectures create blind spots, but the deeper problem is that legacy governance assumes access changes slowly enough to be reviewed manually. That assumption fails when identities are provisioned, reused, and over-extended across cloud, SaaS, and machine workflows. The implication is that governance has to be designed around continuous state change, not periodic reassurance.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 85% of organisations lack full visibility into third-party vendors connected via OAuth apps, according to The State of Non-Human Identity Security.
- Only 1.5 out of 10 organisations are highly confident in their ability to secure NHIs, compared to nearly 1 in 4 for securing human identities.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable when identity governance failures become audit findings?
A: Accountability sits with the control owner, not just the audit team. Identity governance findings usually reflect missing ownership, stale access, or weak evidence trails in operational processes. Frameworks such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 expect governance, protection, detection, and response to work together, so accountability has to sit across operations and security.
👉 Read our full editorial: Risk-based identity governance for CISOs in hybrid enterprise
