Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
10/06/2026 9:19 pm
TL;DR: UiPath alternatives are being evaluated less as workflow replacements and more as identity-control choices, because the article ties automation value to access controls, lifecycle governance, and security features across provisioning, deprovisioning, and app approvals. The real decision is whether automation tooling can be governed like an identity surface, not just deployed as software.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Zluri: Automation Top 10 UiPath Alternatives & Competitors [2026 Updated]
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams govern access for automation platforms?
A: Treat each automation path as a governed identity with an owner, an entitlement set, and a revocation process.
Q: Why do automation tools create NHI governance risk?
A: Because automation usually runs through service accounts, API keys, or tokens that persist beyond a single human session.
Q: What do teams get wrong when comparing UiPath alternatives?
A: They often compare feature breadth before they compare identity control.
Practitioner guidance
- Inventory every automation identity Document the service accounts, API keys, tokens, and integration users used by each automation workflow, then assign an owner for each identity and its entitlements.
- Separate workflow approval from access approval Require a distinct review for the credentials and permissions that power automation, rather than assuming workflow sign-off covers identity risk.
- Test offboarding for automations Remove access for a single workflow and confirm that related credentials, linked approvals, and downstream app permissions actually disappear.
What's in the full article
Zluri's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Side-by-side product comparisons across the 10 UiPath alternatives, including pricing and user-interface differences
- Feature-level notes on workflow orchestration, integrations, analytics, and support that practitioners can use during shortlist building
- Vendor-specific pros and cons that help teams match a tool to an automation use case
- Customer rating snapshots that may help when you are moving from strategy to procurement
👉 Read Zluri's comparison of UiPath alternatives for IT automation teams →
UiPath alternatives and access control gaps in automation tools?
Explore further
12/06/2026 5:38 am
Automation platforms are identity surfaces, not just workflow tools. When an RPA platform can create, use, and sometimes expose access paths, it becomes part of the identity control plane whether teams intended that or not. The article’s emphasis on access controls and lifecycle management reflects a broader reality: automation now sits on top of human and non-human identities at once. Practitioners should evaluate it as governed delegated access, not neutral software.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 1 in 4 organisations are already investing in dedicated NHI security capabilities, with an additional 60% planning to do so within the next twelve months, according to The State of Non-Human Identity Security.
- Two-thirds of enterprises have endured a successful cyberattack resulting from compromised non-human identities, according to The 2024 ESG Report: Managing Non-Human Identities.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can organisations tell whether automation access is actually controlled?
A: Look for evidence that every workflow has a named identity, a current owner, and a revocation trail. If task logs do not map cleanly to authentication records, access is only partially controlled. Good governance shows up when offboarding removes both the workflow and the credential behind it.
👉 Read our full editorial: UiPath alternatives expose the access controls behind automation risk
