Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
11/07/2026 1:54 pm
TL;DR: Hybrid work, third-party access, and cloud-admin sprawl make insider threats harder to contain, while privileged accounts remain the highest-value target because they enable lateral movement, data exfiltration, and control disablement, according to eMudhra. PAM now functions as a core identity control, not an adjacent admin tool: the trust model breaks once standing privilege becomes the default.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by eMudhra: Privileged access management is central to insider threat control
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams reduce insider risk from privileged access in hybrid environments?
A: Start by removing standing privilege, vaulting all privileged credentials, and requiring monitored sessions for elevated access.
Q: Why do privileged accounts increase the impact of insider threats?
A: Privileged accounts can reach infrastructure, cloud consoles, security tools, and sensitive data stores, so misuse scales quickly.
Q: What do teams get wrong about PAM in multi-cloud and hybrid environments?
A: They treat PAM as a separate admin tool instead of a governance layer across IAM, cloud roles, and third-party access.
Practitioner guidance
- Eliminate standing administrative access Convert permanent elevation into time-bound access for infrastructure, cloud consoles, and security tooling.
- Vault and rotate privileged credentials Move hard-coded passwords, shared admin secrets, and cloud management credentials into a central vault, then enforce automatic rotation for any secret that can reach production systems.
- Monitor every privileged session Record commands, screen activity, and session metadata for admin access.
What's in the full article
eMudhra's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Step-by-step guidance on evaluating PAM capabilities for hybrid environments and distributed administration.
- Specific control areas for session monitoring, approval workflows, and privileged termination practices.
- Implementation considerations for integrating PAM with enterprise IAM and MFA controls.
- Practical examples of where cloud privileges and third-party access create governance gaps.
👉 Read eMudhra's analysis of privileged access management for insider threat prevention →
Privileged access management and insider risk in hybrid environments?
Explore further
11/07/2026 2:05 pm
Standing privilege is the governance failure insider risk exploits most reliably. Privileged access that persists beyond task scope gives both malicious insiders and compromised accounts a large attack window. In hybrid estates, that window stretches across cloud consoles, SaaS administration, and remote endpoints, so the control problem is not access volume alone but access duration. Practitioners should treat persistent elevation as a structural exposure, not an operational nuisance.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 67% of organisations still rely heavily on static credentials despite the risks they pose to agentic AI deployments, according to The 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
- 70% of organisations grant AI systems more access than they would give a human employee performing the exact same job, according to The 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own privileged access governance across infrastructure and third-party access?
A: Accountability should sit with identity, security, and infrastructure teams together, because privileged access crosses all three domains. PAM fails when approval, monitoring, and revocation are split across systems with no single owner. Governance works when one policy defines who can elevate, for how long, and under what conditions.
👉 Read our full editorial: Privileged access management is central to insider threat control
