As is my custom of relating current events to IAM, I am going to make what may turn out to be an ill-fated attempt to run my own brackets but instead of selecting college basketball teams, I will attempt to pit, then compare and contrast, IAM projects.  If you are so inclined, this is the time to interject your own derogatory comment.  But note, there is a math quiz later so pay attention.

In the first round, we have the following games on the docket.

Provisioning vs. Single sign-on.  This is a toss up as both projects are evenly matched.  Sure, SSO can present deployment challenges but the enhancement to the end user experience can’t be understated and neither can the savings at the help desk.  On the provisioning side, it’s all about efficiency.  Organizations need to find better ways to do more with less and automating the provisioning of new users, contractors and partners is a clear winner in its space

While does offer some excellent and award winning provisioning products, we also offer many solutions for SSO such as the recently released Cloud Access Manager.  Based on the availability of this new product in the SSO space, we believe it will win this first round match.

Privileged safe vs. Identity auditing.  This one is a slam dunk.  Privileged safe is tried, true and when purchased from us, a trusted technology to protect those valuable credentials.

On the other hand, identity auditing is the big, bad requirement of all IAM projects.  It doesn’t matter if it’s privileged accounts, end users, partners or contractors, this mega-requirement crosses all domains and will be a force to be reckoned with.  Thankfully identity auditing is at the core of all of our IAM solutions and should win in a cake walk.

Time out for a math quiz: In a single-elimination tournament where there are 64 teams, how many games are played before a champion is determined?

Identity governance vs. 2 factor auth.  Many of our customers are seemingly deploying 2 factor in both the hard and soft token variety for end user and privileged accounts.  For those privileged accounts, this means that when an admin logs into one of the critical systems, that admin is asked for a second factor of authentication.  This is done to protect those accounts because they are, after all, the most sought-after of all account.  

Identity governance, on the other hand, is the other dominant force in this year’s bracket.  If there’s a single rallying cry coming from the stands across this year’s IAM projects, it’s, “please help us with our governance.”  We hear this at the start of each game, at each time our and at halftime.  Fortunately, with our solutions, the cries of enthusiasm turn to cries of thanks as our projects near completion.  Because of the enthusiastic cheers that we hear from our supporters, identity governance takes this game.

De-provisioning vs. Data governance.  The last of the first round games juxtaposes these two IAM fan favorites.  De-provisioning, located just across the river from provisioning, offers far more security benefits than its sister school, particularly with dealing with disgruntled employees and admins.  Regardless of which (or both) of these schools you subscribe to, we have you covered.

Data governance is a young, up and comer.  As organizations begin to realize the vast nature of their unstructured data, they acknowledge the need to find, classify and govern access to it.  This is no small feat and thankfully we have solutions to address this key compliance concern.  It is for this reason that we see data governance, despite its relative youth in the market, dominating this match up.

That’s all for now, IAM and sports fans.  For those of you that made it this far, the math quiz and rounds two and three will be unveiled next week but if you have a guess, please post it in the comments below.

Related Content