TL;DR: On premise and cloud IAM differ mainly in where identity services, data, and operational control live, with on premise favouring local control and cloud favouring flexibility, lower upfront cost, and remote access, according to Soffid. The real decision is not security versus convenience, but which deployment model fits the organisation’s regulatory pressure, infrastructure maturity, and risk tolerance.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Soffid: On premise vs cloud IAM, which deployment mode should you choose?
By the numbers:
- 70% of organisations grant AI systems more access than they would give a human employee performing the exact same job.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations choose between on premise and cloud IAM?
A: Start with control requirements, not hosting preference.
Q: Why does cloud IAM complicate governance for regulated organisations?
A: Cloud IAM can complicate governance because evidence, policy enforcement, and data handling are split between the enterprise and the provider.
Q: What breaks when identity governance is designed only for one deployment model?
A: What breaks is consistency.
Practitioner guidance
- Define control ownership by deployment model Document which identity controls remain with the enterprise and which move to the provider, including patching, logging, key management, and incident response responsibilities.
- Test residency and audit requirements against the platform design Verify where identity data is stored, how it moves, and what evidence can be produced for regulators or auditors without manual reconstruction.
- Validate cross-environment governance before standardising Check that lifecycle management, access reviews, and policy enforcement work across on premise systems, cloud services, and SaaS dependencies.
What's in the full article
Soffid's full article covers the practical deployment distinctions this post intentionally leaves at a governance level:
- How the company positions on premise deployment for organisations with local infrastructure and technical staff
- How cloud IAM is described for teams that prioritise accessibility, subscription pricing, and provider-managed maintenance
- The article's sector-based guidance for regulated environments such as finance, healthcare, and government
- The vendor's own comparison of control, cost, and flexibility across the two operating models
👉 Read Soffid's comparison of on premise and cloud IAM deployment models →
On premise IAM vs cloud deployment: what should teams weigh first?
Explore further
Deployment location is not the real security decision in IAM. The real question is who retains operational responsibility for identity policy, evidence, and exception handling when the platform sits on someone else’s infrastructure. Cloud IAM can reduce internal maintenance, but it also moves trust, visibility, and incident coordination into a shared service model. Practitioners should treat deployment choice as a governance design decision, not a vendor packaging decision.
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.
- 59.8% of organisations see value in a solution that simplifies non-human access management and introduces dynamic ephemeral credentials.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable for IAM controls in a cloud deployment?
A: The enterprise remains accountable for governance outcomes, even when the provider operates the platform. The provider may manage infrastructure availability and service operations, but the organisation still owns access policy, identity data handling, and risk acceptance. Clear responsibility mapping is essential, especially where regulations require demonstrable control over identity data and access decisions.
👉 Read our full editorial: On premise vs cloud IAM: how to choose the right deployment model