AI Platform for Identity Governance and Access Control

Since data can be accessed by people, processes and technology, organizations need a multi-pronged approach to data protection. A fundamental step is adopting a robust identity access and management governance framework.

This framework should cover all organizational assets, including cloud applications, on-premises applications, databases and line-of-business applications.

Why Identity Governance and Access Control Matter

Companies implement multiple security measures to protect their systems. However, one of the most important aspects of protecting business data is establishing proper identity management and access control measures.

Identity and Access Management (IAM) solutions manage access provisioning and de-provisioning across systems and applications. However, these solutions must also ensure that access is provided to the right people and the right applications.

An effective IAM framework ensures that access provisioning and de-provisioning follow defined approval workflows. It also tracks who approved and provided access to support security compliance and audits.

Access control ensures that access requests, approvals and access rights are properly reviewed to maintain identity governance and audit readiness.

The Challenges of User Access and Entitlement Reviews

User Access and Entitlement Reviews help organizations ensure that user permissions remain up to date and that orphaned accounts or excessive privileged access do not go unnoticed.

However, one of the biggest challenges is continuously reviewing user access rights and entitlements.

Traditional access review processes are complicated, manual and time-consuming. Identifying users, entitlements and the right managers to conduct reviews on an ongoing basis can become a significant operational challenge.

Organizations need a more efficient approach to managing identity governance and access reviews.

Can AI Transform Identity Governance?

Can organizations create an automated Identity Governance solution using advanced AI platforms?

Can security risks be reduced by continuously monitoring access rights and privileges in real time?

AI platforms can help determine and assign appropriate access privileges to employees and contractors based on attributes such as:

• User behavior
• Access levels
• Operating environment
• Data sensitivity

These platforms can continuously mature over time by learning from available attributes and data.

How AI Improves Identity Governance

By applying AI to identity governance, organizations can:

Provide the Right Access: Help determine appropriate access privileges for employees and contractors based on their roles, behavior and access requirements.

Improve Access Review Decisions: Use relevant user and access information to support better decisions during user access reviews.

Reduce Manual Work: Automate repetitive identity governance activities and reduce the burden of manual access review processes.

Strengthen Security: Improve visibility into user access rights and privileges to help identify potential security risks.

The Future of Identity Governance and Access Control

AI has the potential to transform how organizations manage identities, access privileges and governance processes.

By reducing manual effort, improving access decisions and enabling continuous monitoring, AI-powered identity governance can help organizations strengthen security while making access management more efficient.

The goal is simple: provide the right access to the right people while protecting organizational data and reducing security risks.

About SecurEnds

SecurEnds helps organizations reduce security risks and costs through automated Identity Governance and Access Control.

SecurEnds focuses on securing organizational identities, automating access governance and helping businesses address potential security threats and compliance requirements.

Learn more at www.securends.com.

The post How AI can help Identity Governance appeared first on SecurEnds.

Every UAR demo looks the same

This month I sat with several CISOs who are evaluating user access review platforms. They all said the same thing. Every demo looks good. Every vendor says they automate reviews. Every slide shows a clean dashboard.

I understand the frustration. When I was a CIO, I bought tools that looked great in a demo and then took a year to deliver one real review. The demo used sample data. My environment did not.

The differences between UAR platforms do not show up in the demo. They show up after the contract is signed, when the platform meets your real applications, your real reviewers and your real auditors.

I remember one evaluation clearly. The vendor showed a beautiful review screen. Managers could approve or revoke with one click. We signed. Then we learned that connecting our homegrown billing system was a custom project. Our service accounts were out of scope. And the revoke button opened a ticket that nobody tracked. A year later, our auditors still received spreadsheets.

None of that was hidden. We simply never asked the right questions.

Why this decision matters more than it used to

Five years ago, a user access review meant a list of employees and a few critical applications. That world is gone.

Identities have multiplied. Every organization now manages people, contractors, vendors, service accounts, API keys, bots and AI agents. Only the people show up in HR. The rest appear quietly, through a project, a pilot or a purchase.

Attackers log in instead of breaking in. A forgotten contractor account or an unused admin privilege is a valid key. The access review is one of the few controls that finds those keys before someone else does.

Auditors and examiners expect more. A spreadsheet with a signature column no longer satisfies a SOX auditor or a bank examiner. They want to see who reviewed what, the context behind each decision, and proof that revoked access was actually removed.

AI is adding access faster than anyone can track. Copilots and agents are being connected to email, files and business systems every week. Each one holds real permissions. Most organizations have no inventory of them, let alone a review.

The platform you choose now will have to handle all of this for years. That is why the evaluation deserves more than a demo.

So here are the seven questions I would ask every vendor if I were back in that seat.

The Seven Questions

1. How long until our first real review, on our own applications?

Not a demo tenant. Your applications, your data, your reviewers. Ask for the timeline and ask who does the work. A vendor that needs six months before the first review is selling a project, not a product. A good answer is measured in weeks.

• Warning sign: The timeline starts after a requirements phase, a design phase and a build phase.
• Strong answer: “Most customers onboard applications and run their first review in a few weeks. Here is a reference who did.”

2. Who builds and changes a review campaign?

This is the question that separates platforms most clearly. If every new campaign needs the vendor’s developers, a business analyst and a project manager, you will pay for that every quarter. Your own IAM team should be able to configure a review, change its scope and launch it.

• Warning sign: A statement of work for professional services that is larger than the license.
• Strong answer: A live walk-through where your own analyst builds a campaign in the meeting.

3. Can it reach our custom, legacy and on-premises applications?

Every vendor can connect to Active Directory and Okta. The real test is the homegrown application your finance team depends on, the mainframe, or the system with no API. Ask how those come in, and whether each one is a development project.

• Warning sign: “We can build a custom connector for that” as the answer for every system outside the top twenty.
• Strong answer: Standard methods such as SCIM, REST, JDBC, SFTP and flat files that your team can configure, plus an on-premises option for systems that cannot be reached from the cloud.

4. Does it review service accounts, API keys and AI agents?

Most identities in a large enterprise are no longer people. Service accounts run integrations. API keys sit in scripts. AI agents read email and take action. A review that only covers employees covers the smallest part of the risk. Each non-human identity needs an owner and a place in the same campaign.

• Warning sign: Non-human identities are “on the roadmap” or handled by a separate product with a separate review.
• Strong answer: A live view of service accounts and AI agents, what each can reach, and who owns it, inside the same campaign as people.

5. What do reviewers see on each line?

Most managers approve access they cannot see. They click approve because the alternative is breaking someone’s job. Ask what context the reviewer gets. Usage data, such as last login, and flags for segregation-of-duties conflicts change the decision. Without them, you are paying for a faster rubber stamp.

• Warning sign: A reviewer screen that shows only entitlement names, and an “approve all” button.
• Strong answer: Usage data, privileged access flags and SoD conflicts on every line, with a suggested action.

6. Does a revoke actually remove access?

A revoke that creates a ticket is not the same as a revoke that removes access. Ask how the decision reaches the target system, and whether the removal is confirmed and logged. Auditors will ask the same question.

• Warning sign: Remediation is “handled by your ITSM process” with no confirmation back to the review.
• Strong answer: The revoke flows to the target system, and the review record shows when the access was actually removed.

7. What will our auditors receive?

Ask to see the actual report. It should show every decision, who made it, when and why, and the evidence that the change happened. Then ask whether that report has held up in SOX and regulator reviews at companies like yours.

• Warning sign: The vendor shows a dashboard but cannot produce a sample export.
• Strong answer: A real report, exportable in one click, that a reference customer’s auditor has accepted.

The Hidden Cost of the Wrong Choice

The license is the smallest part of what a UAR platform costs. The real cost shows up in three places.

Time. If every review needs a services team, you pay for it every quarter, forever. If reviewers still work from spreadsheets because half your applications never got connected, your team spends weeks on each cycle.

Risk. A platform that only covers employees leaves service accounts and AI agents unreviewed. A platform that cannot remove access leaves revoked permissions in place. Both look fine on a dashboard and fail in an incident.

Audit findings. A report that cannot show context, decisions and proof of removal invites follow-up questions. Repeat findings cost far more in credibility than any software.

A Simple Scorecard

Score each vendor from 1 to 5 on every question, using what you saw on your own applications, not what you saw in the demo.

• Time to first real review
• Who builds and changes campaigns
• Coverage of custom, legacy and on-premises applications
• Non-human and AI identities in the same review
• Reviewer context: usage data and SoD conflicts
• Closed-loop remediation with confirmation
• Audit evidence your auditors accept

The vendor with the highest total is rarely the one with the best slides.

Test Every Vendor on Your Own Applications

The fastest way to compare platforms is to run the same real review on each one. It does not need to be large.

• Pick three to five applications. Include at least one custom or legacy system and one with service accounts.
• Let your team build the campaign. You will learn quickly who really does the work.
• Run a review with real reviewers. Watch what they see and how long they take.
• Compare the evidence. Put the reports side by side and ask your auditors which one they would accept.

Agree on success criteria before you start. The seven questions above make a good scorecard. A vendor that is confident in its product will welcome the test.

Questions to Ask Every Reference

References are the most honest part of an evaluation, if you ask the right questions. Skip “Are you happy?” Ask these instead.

• How long did it take from signature to your first completed review?
• How many people from the vendor were involved in that first review? How many from your team?
• Which of your applications are still not connected, and why?
• Are service accounts and AI agents in your reviews today, or planned?
• How has your auditor or examiner responded to the reports?
• What did you have to change in your own process to make it work?
• If you were choosing again, would you choose the same platform?

The answer to the last question tells you more than any demo.

The Questions Sound Different in Every Industry

The seven questions apply everywhere, but the pressure behind them changes.

• Banks and credit unions. Examiners want GLBA and FFIEC evidence. The core platform, lending systems and wire applications must be in scope from day one. Ask how core user reports come into the review.
• Healthcare. Shift workers, travel nurses and affiliated clinicians come and go constantly. Ask how quickly leavers lose access to the EHR, and how device and integration accounts are reviewed.
• Public sector. Long-tenured users, shared accounts and state frameworks such as TX-RAMP raise the bar. Ask about certifications the vendor already holds.
• Manufacturing and logistics. Separation of duties in ERP and purchasing is the finding that keeps coming back. Ask to see an SoD conflict flagged in a live review.
• Technology companies. AI agents and cloud roles grow faster than anywhere else. Ask how the platform finds agents nobody registered.

After You Choose: The First 90 Days

The evaluation is only the start. The first 90 days decide whether the platform becomes part of how you operate or another tool on the shelf.

Days 1 to 30: Connect and see. Connect your directory, your critical applications and your systems of record. Build one inventory of every human, non-human and AI identity. Most teams find orphaned and shared accounts in the first week.

Days 31 to 60: Review and clean up. Run your first campaign on the applications your auditors care about most. Use usage data to remove access nobody uses. Assign owners to service accounts and agents.

Days 61 to 90: Prove and repeat. Export the evidence, walk your auditor through it and schedule the next cycle. Then add the next group of applications.

If your chosen platform cannot support this pace, you will know within the first month. That is another reason to test before you buy.

The Demo Is Not the Decision

Access reviews are not a feature you buy once. They are a process you run every quarter, for years, in front of auditors and examiners. The right platform makes that process lighter every cycle. The wrong one turns it into a permanent project.

These questions are the ones I wish someone had handed me as a CIO. They are also the questions we built SecurEnds to answer. Our customers onboard their applications and run their first access reviews in 2 to 6 weeks, across human, non-human and AI identities.

But do not take any vendor’s word for it, including ours. Ask the seven questions. Run the test.

Find it. Review it. Prove it.

https://www.securends.com

The post Seven Questions to Ask Before You Buy a User Access Review Platform appeared first on SecurEnds.

We founded SecurEnds more than three years ago with a vision to disrupt Identity Governance by creating a solution that is easier to use and more accessible to organizations of all sizes. As cybersecurity began to emerge as a central issue for many organizations, we noticed a growing market need to better address identity risk and compliance without the tedious processes that often accompany it.

So, we set out to build a versatile product without the constraints of incumbent on-prem solutions: a platform that could integrate efficiently into a company of any size and meet their specific needs and goals.

Fast forward to today, and organizations continue to prioritize risk mitigation and compliance, especially as they accelerate their digital roadmap across both on-prem and cloud deployments. And as part of their security and compliance standards, there is a real need for a SaaS-based product that can be easily implemented and stood up to achieve access certifications within SOX, HIPAA, PCI-DSS, GDPR, and ISO 27001.

Just two years since our first customer implementation and we’re thrilled by how the market has responded so positively to our product. We’re currently empowering nearly 100 of the world’s most forward-thinking companies to fully automate user access reviews, entitlement audits, access requests, and segregation of duty. Demand has never been greater!

To continue supporting our customers and further expand our reach, I am grateful to announce that we have closed a $21 million Series A led exclusively by Elephant. We’re thrilled to partner with them for the strategic counsel and capital needed to scale globally. You can read the full announcement here.

We’ll be using the investment – one of the largest Series A rounds in Atlanta’s emerging cybersecurity and tech startup ecosystem to date – to scale operations, to invest in product research and development and to expand into new territories across Europe and Asia. We’re excited to grow our incredible family and will be looking to hire over 125 new colleagues in sales, marketing, engineering and customer success roles in Atlanta and around the globe. We’re ready to take on the world.

To the entire SecurEnds team, thank you for all your hard work and dedication getting us to this important moment in time. We wouldn’t have reached this milestone without each and every one of you. Thank you to our early adopter customers and partners for having the confidence to work with us. We thought we had something special to offer, but you helped us prove the concept and continue to help us iterate on it to this day. And thank you to our future customers and partners – we look forward to welcoming you to the SecurEnds family.

And of course, thank you to Elephant for believing in our vision, the market opportunity, and our technology. Your partnership is critical to our long-term success.

Today is an exciting day for everyone at SecurEnds. And while we’ll enjoy it tremendously, tomorrow we get back to work. Our vision is not yet complete – we’re just one step closer on the long journey to achieving it.

The post What our Series A Means for the Future of Cloud & Identity Governance appeared first on SecurEnds.