Most security incidents do not start with malware. They start with a user account that has too many permissions. Today, attackers often no longer need sophisticated intrusion techniques. In many cases, exploiting existing permissions is enough.
Every Permission Is a Security Decision
Every access right enables visibility into data and the ability to change systems. The challenge: in many organizations, nobody can reliably answer which effective permissions a user actually has and what actions those permissions allow.
As the number of non-human identities increases, visibility decreases. Studies indicate that organizations now manage significantly more technical identities than human users. Service accounts, APIs, and automation processes are often created in a decentralized manner during operations. Many of them hold extensive permissions without clear ownership or transparent usage.
Permission Sprawl Happens Gradually
Very few organizations intentionally grant excessive permissions. Access rights accumulate over years through project groups, temporary exceptions, departmental changes, new applications, and increasingly complex group structures.
A typical pattern: A project ends, but permissions remain. An employee changes departments, while previous access rights stay active. New permissions are added, old ones are never removed. Over time, a growing gap emerges between documented roles and actual access rights. This lack of visibility becomes a problem—not only during audits, but also during security incidents.
AI Agents Create New Blind Spots
Current developments are further accelerating this challenge through automation and AI-based systems. AI agents independently access applications, data, and interfaces, increasingly acting like digital employees. Organizationally, however, they are still often treated as traditional service accounts.
Unclear permission scopes, missing ownership, permanently active access, and insufficient oversight are turning technical identities into one of the largest blind spots in modern security architectures.
Role Models vs. Reality
Identity & Access Management (IAM) controls which permissions users, technical accounts, and systems receive. This is typically based on role models: ideally, employees receive access through clearly defined roles aligned with responsibilities and business tasks.
In practice, however, an organizational disconnect often emerges. IT teams think in groups and system permissions. Business units think in tasks, processes, and responsibilities. If these perspectives are not aligned, role models may appear technically correct while failing operationally.
The result: exception handling and workarounds that bypass centralized IAM. Over time, this leads to exactly what structured role models are meant to prevent: loss of control.
Start Small With IAM and Achieve Significant Security Gains
A successful IAM journey rarely begins with a complete redesign of all permissions. A more practical approach is to focus first on high-risk areas such as privileged accounts, access to sensitive data, or critical business applications. Clearly defined environments make role models easier to structure and reduce risks immediately. At the same time, organizations gain valuable proof-of-concepts, lessons learned, and scalable standards for future expansion.
Least Privilege Does Not Mean Minimal Access
To effectively secure identities, permissions must not only be structured—they must remain manageable and regularly reviewed. Least Privilege does not mean restricting users. Employees must remain productive. Instead, the goal is to ensure users receive exactly the permissions they require for their tasks, without becoming a security risk through unnecessary access rights. This requires clear structures, defined responsibilities, and regular reviews and recertifications.
- Which permissions are still required?
- Which accounts have unnecessary administrator rights?
- Which technical accounts are no longer used?
This is where IAM, IGA, and PAM work together:
- IAM (Identity & Access Management) manages identities and access rights.
- IGA (Identity Governance & Administration) establishes governance and control mechanisms.
- PAM (Privileged Access Management) protects privileged access.
While these concepts may seem abstract, they ultimately need to be translated into concrete organizational and technical decisions. The market offers numerous solutions. The real challenge for mid-sized organizations is finding a pragmatic starting point that works both operationally and economically.
Learn more about practical Identity Management approaches in our next article: >>MVP Instead of Large-Scale Transformation: Building Identity Management Pragmatically<<