Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
06/06/2026 1:40 am
TL;DR: Gartner’s October 2025 report says 70% of CISOs will be using an identity visibility and intelligence platform by 2028, as organisations seek a single view of IAM data, activity, relationships, and posture across fragmented tools, according to Axiad’s analysis of the category. The key issue is not more dashboards, but the intelligence layer that connects human, non-human, and machine identities into one risk picture.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: A CISO Called Us an ISPM Vendor. Here's What We Told Him
By the numbers:
- Gartner projects that by 2028, 70% of CISOs will be using an IVIP to shrink their IAM attack surface.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts.
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams unify identity risk across IAM tools?
A: Security teams should correlate identity data from directories, PAM, IGA, ISPM, SaaS, and machine identity systems into one risk view.
Q: Why do machine identities complicate identity posture management?
A: Machine identities complicate posture management because they are numerous, persistent, and often poorly owned.
Q: How do you know if identity posture tooling is actually working?
A: Identity posture tooling is working when it reduces time to answer critical questions, closes the gap between finding and remediation, and shows a measurable decline in over-privilege and dormant access.
Practitioner guidance
- Inventory identity data sources across the stack List every system that holds entitlement, authentication, or lifecycle data, including directories, PAM, IGA, SaaS, and machine identity stores.
- Add machine identities to governance reviews Include service accounts, API keys, OAuth tokens, certificates, and cloud roles in recurring identity reviews so non-human access is assessed alongside workforce access.
- Quantify identity risk in business terms Translate the most material identity findings into loss exposure, blast radius, or estimated remediation value so leaders can compare identity risk with other security priorities.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog post covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- How Axiad Mesh correlates identity data across IGA, PAM, ITDR, identity providers, and SaaS platforms.
- The scoring logic behind the identity risk model, including how severity, probability, prevalence, and ALE are used.
- The specific remediation workflow integrations that connect identity findings to existing management platforms.
- How Axiad positions machine identities, AI agents, and authentication gaps inside its own IVIP model.
👉 Read Axiad's analysis of IVIP and identity attack surface reduction →
Identity visibility and intelligence platforms: what IAM teams need?
Explore further
06/06/2026 2:55 am
Identity visibility and intelligence is the missing control plane, not another point product. ISPM is useful, but it only addresses a subset of the identity problem by surfacing hygiene defects in isolated systems. The broader issue is that enterprises have accumulated identity tools without a unifying intelligence layer, so risk remains fragmented across directories, SaaS, PAM, and machine identity systems. The implication is that mature IAM programmes now need correlation as a control objective, not just more findings.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 71% of NHIs are not rotated within recommended time frames, increasing the risk of compromise over time.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between ISPM and identity visibility platforms?
A: ISPM focuses on posture findings such as misconfigurations, excessive permissions, and weak authentication within a narrower slice of the environment. An identity visibility platform correlates those findings across the full identity stack and turns them into a unified intelligence model. The difference is scope, correlation, and decision quality.
👉 Read our full editorial: Identity visibility and intelligence is wider than ISPM alone
