Topic starter
12/06/2026 12:11 am
TL;DR: Privileged access management is now a baseline control for remote, cloud-first organisations, and JumpCloud argues the right model should be simple to deploy, integrate across identity and SaaS, and stay manageable for small teams. The governance issue is no longer whether PAM belongs in large enterprises, but whether it can work without perimeter assumptions and operational drag.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by JumpCloud: “What to Look for In a Modern PAM Solution”.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams implement PAM in cloud-first environments?
A: They should start with the privileged paths that matter most, then design for cloud services, remote infrastructure, and SaaS access rather than on-premise only workflows.
Q: Why do legacy PAM models create risk for hybrid teams?
A: Legacy PAM models often assume an on-prem network boundary, custom deployment effort, and specialist administration.
Q: What signs show that PAM controls are not working properly?
A: Frequent exceptions, long-lived admin accounts, missing session logs, and access that remains unchanged after role or ownership changes all point to weak PAM governance.
Practitioner guidance
- Clarify your PAM operating model Document who assigns privileged access, who reviews it, who monitors sessions, and who owns compliance evidence when IT and security share administration.
- Test PAM without perimeter assumptions Validate that privileged access works from remote locations, across SaaS and cloud infrastructure, and without requiring a VPN to mediate every session.
- Measure deployment and maintenance overhead Assess whether the solution can be deployed without custom integrations and maintained by a small team without dedicated engineering support.
Bottom line: Privileged access management has to match how remote and hybrid teams actually work, or it will be bypassed in practice.
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
12/06/2026 9:16 am
Modern PAM is now an access-operations problem, not an enterprise-size problem. The article is right to push back on the idea that privileged access governance only belongs in large, centrally staffed environments. Remote and hybrid work have moved privilege outside the old perimeter model, so the question is whether the control can be administered by the teams that actually operate the estate. Practitioners should treat PAM as a baseline governance capability, not a tiered luxury.
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.
- 49% of IT professionals would prioritise improving privileged access management if the decision were theirs alone, according to Netwrix's 2023 Hybrid Security Trends Report.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own PAM in a shared IT and security model?
A: Ownership should be shared, but accountability must stay clear. IT needs enough access to run the environment, while Security needs the approval, monitoring, and review layer that keeps privilege auditable. The control fails when either team is excluded from the workflow.
👉 Read our full editorial: Privileged access management for remote teams needs a modern model
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group