Executive Summary

This article presents a detailed analysis of one of the most severe cybersecurity incidents ever to impact Brazil’s Payment System (Sistema de Pagamentos Brasileiro – SPB), which occurred in June and July of 2025. The breach was directly linked to C&M Software, a major Information Technology Services Provider (PSTI) for the national banking sector. This incident exposed, for the first time at this scale, the critical role PSTIs play within the financial ecosystem, and how internal vulnerabilities can reverberate systemically, compromising the integrity of financial operations across hundreds of banks and institutions.

The Brazilian Financial System (Sistema Financeiro Nacional – SFN) serves as the infrastructure enabling the circulation of money, credit, and payments throughout the country. It involves the Central Bank, banks, fintechs, credit cooperatives, payment institutions, and specialized technology providers, such as PSTIs. Through the SPB and the Instant Payments System (SPI), the SFN ensures fast, secure, and traceable settlement of fund transfers between institutions, thereby upholding trust and maintaining market functionality.

This cyberattack was facilitated through the compromise of C&M Software’s internal IT environment. A malicious insider—an employee of the PSTI—was recruited by a cybercriminal group and, in exchange for financial compensation, granted privileged access to internal systems, passwords, and sensitive institutional certificates. That access allowed attackers to manipulate the credentials and private keys of several C&M clients, primarily banks and fintechs, including BMP Money Plus. From there, attackers generated fraudulent transactions, signed in proper compliance with SPI’s cryptographic and procedural standards, allowing them to be instantly settled by the Central Bank. As these operations were technically valid, they were automatically debited from the reserve accounts of the victim institutions.

Because C&M Software acted as a core technical hub for hundreds of institutions, the breach had a wide-reaching and magnified impact. Not only did BMP Money Plus suffer substantial financial losses, but at least five other institutions were also compromised. The siphoned funds were immediately funneled through accounts held by mules, then quickly transferred to cryptoasset exchanges for conversion into Bitcoin and USDT, effectively complicating their traceability and recovery.

Due to its central role, C&M was at the center of the response efforts: alerted by affected institutions, C&M notified the Central Bank, implemented emergency containment measures, and had its operations within the SPB suspended until robust new controls could be enforced. The incident underscores how shortcomings in governance, privilege management, and certificate protection can result in systemic consequences. This analysis underscores the necessity of key security measures, including behavioral monitoring, automated credential management, just-in-time access control, and strict separation of client secrets to prevent similar events within such a highly interconnected financial environment like the SFN.

‍

1. Introduction

In a financial system built on trust and speed, a single insider can bring the entire network to a halt.
‍

Over the last two decades, Brazil has emerged as a global reference in financial innovation and infrastructure modernization. Its Financial System (SFN) stands out for its level of digital maturity, robust regulatory framework, and ability to integrate multiple market actors, fostering inclusion, efficiency, and large-scale security. One of the latest milestones in this evolution is the Instant Payment System (SPI), which, in tandem with PIX, has positioned Brazil ahead of many global markets in terms of speed and ubiquity of electronic fund transfers.
‍

PIX/SPI has become the financial backbone for transactions involving individuals, businesses, fintechs, and banks, processing billions of transfers with near-immediate settlement across accounts belonging to different institutions. This orchestration is made possible not just by the Central Bank but by a network of specialized providers—the Information Technology Services Providers (PSTIs)—who perform critical functions in clearing, settlement, and interconnection for traditional banks, credit unions, payment institutions, and digital platforms. The advent of open finance has further intensified reliance on these technical intermediaries, expanding both the number and diversity of participants and interfaces within Brazil’s digital financial ecosystem.
‍

However, this growth also brings new and complex challenges. As digitalization progresses and integrations multiply, so too do points of exposure to cyber threats, fraud, governance failures, and supply chain vulnerabilities. With operations distributed across many players—often with unequal security maturity—an isolated breach has the potential to jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and systemic availability of services that individuals and businesses rely on daily. Additionally, given the growing use of APIs, outsourced operations, and the sharing of institutional secrets, new attack surfaces are created for insiders, cybercriminals, and advanced persistent threat (APT) actors.
‍

The case examined in this article offers a stark exemplification of the risks and critical weak points in Brazil’s so-called “chain of trust.” By analyzing a real-life breach involving a central PSTI supporting banks and fintechs, we highlight the root causes, technical and institutional impacts, and practical recommendations to strengthen system resilience, privileged access management, and behavioral security controls within a complex and highly interconnected financial environment.
‍

‍

2. Understanding Brazil’s Financial System

The SFN operates via multiple interconnected components to ensure fast and secure interbank settlements. The Central Bank of Brazil (BACEN) serves as both the top regulator and operator of the Brazilian Payment System (SPB), which includes banks, payment institutions, technology providers (PSTIs), and cryptocurrency exchanges.
‍

Reserve Accounts

A cornerstone of the SPB is the reserve account, maintained by each financial institution with the Central Bank. These accounts power SPI (Instant Payment System), enabling irreversible, real-time transaction settlements via PIX.
‍

Banking-as-a-Service (BaaS)

BaaS platforms like BMP Money Plus enable fintechs, funds, and digital platforms to leverage full banking infrastructure, maintain reserve accounts, and facilitate payments through the SPB.
‍

Role of Exchanges

Cryptocurrency exchanges such as SmartPay and Truther bridge traditional finance and the crypto world, playing an essential role in transaction traceability and regulatory compliance at scale.

‍

3. Incident Description

At 4:00 a.m. on June 30, 2025, a senior executive at BMP Money Plus—a fintech specializing in banking-as-a-service (BaaS) solutions—received an unexpected call from CorpX Bank, alerting him to an unauthorized transfer of R$18 million from BMP’s reserve account. As the person responsible for managing those reserves with the Central Bank, the executive quickly identified that other similarly unauthorized PIX transactions were actively underway at that moment. BMP’s internal team immediately launched containment efforts and, by around 5:00 a.m., officially reported the incident to C&M Software, their critical payment processing service provider.
‍

Initial investigations and information published in the media indicated that the attack originated from an internal compromise at C&M Software—one of the leading PSTIs in Brazil’s Payment System (SPB). An internal facilitator, allegedly motivated by financial gain, provided privileged credentials to cybercriminals and assisted in executing malicious commands within company systems. Possessing privileged access and the digital certificates of C&M’s financial institution clients—including BMP itself and at least five other institutions—the attackers were able to inject fraudulent PIX orders directly into the SPI/SPB infrastructure. Because the transactions were digitally signed using valid institutional certificates, the Central Bank’s core systems processed them as legitimate, immediately debiting funds from the reserve accounts of the victim institutions.
‍

It is estimated that approximately R$400 million was siphoned from BMP’s reserve account alone, with R$160 million later successfully recovered. Following the breach, stolen funds were swiftly transferred to accounts held by third parties at smaller banks and payment institutions, particularly cryptoasset platforms integrated with PIX, including exchanges, gateways, and swap platforms. Most of the stolen funds were quickly converted into USDT or Bitcoin, further complicating traceability. However, in at least one case, an exchange that detected a high volume of suspicious activity froze the settlement and immediately notified BMP, thereby preventing the dispersion of a portion of the stolen funds.
‍

Given the magnitude of the attack and in order to prevent further losses, the Central Bank ordered an emergency suspension of C&M Software’s systems from the SPB—affecting PIX operations across more than 300 financial institutions that relied on its services. Despite the substantial financial damage, BMP Money Plus publicly emphasized that no end-customer funds were affected and that institutional guarantees fully covered the stolen amounts. Meanwhile, the Federal Police, activated by the Central Bank, opened a formal investigation to examine potential crimes such as criminal conspiracy, fraud-related theft, unauthorized system intrusion, and money laundering. The case remains under active investigation.

4. Incident Timeline

Below is the timeline of key events related to the incident—from initial compromise to response—based on information available at the time.

• June 30, 2025 – 12:18 AM: Exchanges such as SmartPay and Truther detect unusually high transaction volumes in Bitcoin/USDT and alert executives at financial institutions.
• June 30, 2025 – 4:00 AM: A BMP Money Plus executive is informed of an unusual PIX transfer totaling R$18 million; multiple unauthorized transactions are identified.
• June 30, 2025 – 5:00 AM: BMP executives report the incident to C&M Software.
• June 30, 2025: The Central Bank orders the emergency disconnection of C&M Software from the SPB.
• July 1, 2025: News portal Brazil Journal publishes an in-depth report on the cyberattack.
• July 2, 2025: BMP Money Plus issues an official statement acknowledging the breach.
• July 3, 2025: The Central Bank announces the partial restoration of C&M Software’s operations and confirms the arrest of an employee involved in the incident.
• July 4, 2025: Authorities confirm the detention of a staff member suspected of aiding the cybercriminal operation.

5. Technical Analysis of the Incident

The incident that unfolded between June 29 and July 4, 2025, may represent one of the largest systemic frauds ever recorded within Brazil’s Payment System (SPB), involving a wide range of actors—from external cybercriminals and internal insiders to financial institutions, technology service providers, and regulatory authorities. Below is a technical, chronological breakdown of the attack’s modus operandi, the mechanisms exploited, the money flow, and institutional responses.

‍

1. Initial Compromise: Insider Threat and Privilege Escalation

The first step in the incident was an internal compromise at C&M Software, an authorized and mission-critical Information Technology Services Provider (PSTI) within Brazil’s financial ecosystem. According to official investigations and media reports, an employee at C&M—referred to here as the “Facilitator”—was recruited by a cybercriminal group. Motivated by financial incentives, the insider shared administrative credentials and, following external instructions, executed strategic commands that enabled the attackers to operate undetected within the company’s internal environment.
‍

This privileged access was essential. It allowed the attackers to discover and retrieve cryptographic keys and digital certificates belonging to C&M’s client institutions, enabling the group to digitally impersonate those financial institutions. In many financial environments, inadequate segregation of secrets management (keys, certificates, and credentials) between clients and tech providers makes these attacks exponentially more dangerous.

‍

2. Injection of Fraudulent Orders and Automated Settlement

Once in possession of the original digital credentials and certificates belonging to compromised institutions—particularly BMP Money Plus and at least five others—the attackers began fabricating and injecting PIX payment orders directly into SPI (Instant Payment System) and SPB. Since the digital signatures were valid and the requests followed standard cryptographic formats, the Central Bank’s settlement infrastructure processed and executed them as legitimate. The SPI system, by design, presumes the authenticity of requests from verified participants.
‍

During the night of June 29 to June 30, these operations were carried out in bulk, automated fashion, outside of business hours—when manual oversight tends to be minimal. The reserve accounts of the victim institutions—held with the Central Bank for interbank operations—were systematically debited without triggering any SPI anomalies.

‍

3. Rapid Dispersion and Chain Effect

The next step involved the immediate dispersion of stolen funds. Large amounts—often sent in batches—were moved to “mule accounts” and smaller payment institutions (PIs), many of which featured less stringent KYC, onboarding, and compliance protocols. Funds were then transferred to cryptoasset service providers such as exchanges, OTC platforms, and swap apps. There, they were converted into Bitcoin and USDT and moved to wallets held by the attackers—often split into many small transactions to evade tracing.
‍

This sequence underscores the attackers’ operational sophistication:

• Exploiting supply chain links between the PSTI (C&M) and multiple banks/fintechs;
• Leveraging scripts and automation to submit dozens of transactions in succession;
• Executing the fraud during off-peak operational hours.

‍

4. Timeline of Actions, Detection, and Response

🕛 June 30, 2025 – 12:18 AM: Initial Detection by Exchanges
SmartPay and Truther exchanges were the first to detect suspicious activity. Their monitoring systems flagged abnormal transaction volumes and unusual purchases of Bitcoin/USDT made via PIX, triggering alerts to internal compliance teams and associated financial institutions.
‍

🕓 June 30, 2025 – 4:00 AM: BMP Executives Flag the Incident
Prompted by exchange alerts and transaction analysis, a BMP Money Plus executive was contacted by a CorpX Bank representative regarding an extraordinary PIX transfer of R$18 million originating from BMP. This kicked off an internal audit that revealed several unauthorized SPI transactions debiting BMP’s reserve account.
‍

🕔 June 30, 2025 – 5:00 AM: Incident Escalation
BMP formally notified C&M Software, reporting the breach and requesting urgent assistance from the provider responsible for part of the institution’s interbank infrastructure. By this point, the breadth of the attack suggested a systemic compromise affecting multiple C&M clients.
‍

⚠️ June 30, 2025: Regulatory Response — Central Bank Intervention
With converging reports from exchanges, BMP, and other affected financial institutions, the Central Bank was officially notified of a potential systemic breach. As an emergency measure, it ordered the precautionary suspension of C&M Software’s connections to SPB—halting PIX operations across all institutions that interfaced through its platform. This action aimed to prevent further fraud and maintain system liquidity, despite triggering operational interruptions for hundreds of banks, fintechs, and payment entities.
‍

📰 From July 1, 2025 Onward: Public Disclosure, Analysis, and Partial Recovery
In the days that followed, national media widely covered the breach, and official statements from BMP, C&M Software, and the Central Bank confirmed that no end-user funds had been affected. BMP reported that, of the R$400 million initially stolen, approximately R$160 million had been recovered through rapid collaboration with crypto exchanges, court orders, and financial tracing efforts.
‍

Later, the Central Bank authorized the partial reactivation of C&M’s services—only after new control mechanisms and stricter access segregation were implemented. Amid the ongoing investigation, authorities confirmed the identification and arrest of the “facilitator”, the insider who enabled the breach. The Federal Police continues to investigate charges related to unauthorized access, banking fraud, and money laundering.

‍

5. Operational Roles Across the Attack Chain

• Cybercriminals: Strategized and executed the attack, exploiting both human and technical vulnerabilities. Used automation to scale operations and reduce execution time.
• Insider (Facilitator): Served as the human vulnerability, granting “legitimate” access to core systems. Illustrates the danger of excessive privilege and lack of behavioral monitoring.
• C&M Software (PSTI): Due to the absence of strong access segregation and behavioral controls, acted as the point of compromise that exposed its entire client base.
• Victim FIs: Banks and fintechs whose reserve accounts were debited, suffering direct financial loss and reputational impact.
• SPI/SPB: The infrastructure processed all digitally signed payment orders as expected—highlighting the limitations of automated controls against insider-originated attacks.
• Mule Accounts / Payment Institutions (PIs): Weak onboarding and due diligence processes made them attractive channels for laundering and dispersing stolen funds.
• Exchanges: A key positive aspect—proactive exchange-based compliance systems successfully detected, contained, and reported portions of the fraud, helping reduce total impact.

Below, you’ll find a step-by-step visualization of the incident flow:

6. MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

The attack on C&M Software’s environment demonstrates a well-defined chain of techniques documented in the MITRE ATT&CK Framework (Enterprise v17). Mapping these techniques supports threat hunting, incident response, and the enhancement of internal security controls across financial institutions and PSTI providers.
‍

Below, we highlight the main tactics and techniques involved, referencing specific examples from the 2025 incident.

7. APT Groups: Exploratory Assessment

It is important to highlight that, as of now, none of the groups listed below have any confirmed connection to the attack under investigation. These references are intended primarily to inform threat intelligence efforts and assist in shaping strategic defense planning.
‍

Although there has been no formal attribution to any internationally recognized Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) groups, the technical analysis of the attack on C&M Software reveals multiple operational similarities with campaigns previously carried out by sophisticated threat actors. These actors vary in motivation, technical breadth, and focus—often targeting critical financial infrastructures.
‍

The purpose of this mapping is to help place the Brazilian incident within the context of global cyber threat trends, supporting the early identification of attack patterns and contributing to more proactive and intelligence-driven defense strategies.

The groups outlined below demonstrate common Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) seen in supply chain compromises, banking intrusions, ransomware campaigns, and money-laundering-driven data exfiltration:

‍

Notable Examples

• Plump Spider – Known for leveraging the Clop ransomware, this group has been involved in systemic attacks on global financial institutions. Its operations often combine supply chain compromise, large-scale data and confidential information exfiltration, and laundering of proceeds via cryptoasset mixer services.
• TA505 – Specializes in malspam-driven campaigns, frequent use of Cobalt Strike for post-exploitation, and targeted attacks on banks and fintechs. Notable for its ability to rapidly convert and disperse illicit funds.
• FIN7 / Carbanak – With an established reputation for social engineering and persistent access to banking environments, FIN7 is known for extended campaigns that leverage legitimate infrastructure and internal credentials to facilitate stealthy data exfiltration and fund diversion.
• LAPSUS$ – Gained notoriety for its highly visible and theatrical attacks on major enterprises, with a particular focus on social engineering, privileged access acquisition, and the public exposure of stolen data. While the group is not a direct fit for this incident, which centers on financial operations, some alignment remains in terms of initial access and insider exploitation tactics.

‍

8. Mitigation Strategies

Given the context and the vulnerabilities exposed by the incident, we propose a set of mitigation measures focused on behavioral security, automated credential management, and strong governance across the digital supply chain:

• Behavioral Analytics: Real-time detection of anomalous privileged access; automatic blocking based on deviation patterns, with correlation by geolocation, time of access, and other indicators.
• Just-in-Time Access: Grant privileged access strictly for specific tasks or timeframes, thereby reducing exposure windows to insider threats.
• Credential Rotation (triggered by anomalous behavior): Credentials are automatically refreshed or revoked upon detection of any suspicious activity.
• Secrets and Token Management for APIs and Supply Chain: Deployment of secure vaulting tools to safely isolate and manage third-party integrations and secrets.
• Certificate Management and Rotation: Continuous monitoring and automated renewal of digital certificates used in critical financial operations.
• Third-Party Access Control: Implementation of Zero Trust policies for partners, with strict onboarding and offboarding processes.

Reference Architecture: A recommended visual design illustrating an integrated security model for PSTIs, financial institutions, and the Central Bank (suggested as a flowchart or architecture diagram).

‍

9. Conclusion

The attack that impacted C&M Software and multiple institutions connected to Brazil’s Payment System (SPB) underscores the critical role of behavioral cybersecurity and credential control in safeguarding financial ecosystems. This event exposed significant weaknesses in privileged access management, particularly within trust relationships between financial institutions and their technology service providers. It clearly demonstrates that traditional paradigms—relying solely on logical perimeters, firewalls, and network segmentation—are insufficient to defend against insider threats, supply chain compromise, and sophisticated attacks enabled by the misuse of valid credentials and seemingly legitimate but unauthorized operations.
‍

The incident revealed that insider actions, improper certificate usage, and the absence of behavioral monitoring allowed fraudulent activity to flow through automated systems without triggering alarms across various points in the chain. Additionally, it reinforced the importance of traceability, real-time threat intelligence, and collaborative defense among key ecosystem players including fintechs, banks, exchanges, and regulatory bodies.
‍

From the lessons learned, the following mitigation strategies stand out:

• Continuous Behavioral Analytics: Monitor privileged user behavior in real time, generating alerts and automated blocks when anomalies are detected—such as unusual access times, organizational changes, or abnormal geolocation data.
• Just-in-Time Access & Least Privilege: Minimize the time during which sensitive credentials remain active. Grant access strictly for specific tasks and timeframes, with comprehensive logging and traceability.
• Credential Rotation Triggered by Anomalies: Implement mechanisms for the automatic replacement of passwords, tokens, and certificates whenever suspicious behavior is detected—preventing persistence or reuse of compromised access.
• Secure Management of Secrets, Tokens, and Digital Certificates: Centralize the lifecycle control, usage auditing, and periodic renewal of these assets—especially across integrations between financial institutions, PSTIs, and APIs—to mitigate leakage and misuse risks.
• Zero Trust Policies and Tight Third-Party Controls: Define robust procedures for granting, monitoring, and revoking access to partners, vendors, and external teams. Ensure consistent due diligence and oversight.
  ‍

Ultimately, the case highlights that operational resilience, rapid intelligence sharing, transparent communication, and the integration of technical and procedural controls are foundational pillars for the systemic defense of the national financial environment in the face of evolving and sophisticated threats.

Speak to Our Experts
To learn how Segura® can support your organization in behavioral cybersecurity, privileged access management, and fraud-resistant architecture, contact us for a personalized strategic assessment.

 

Learn how AI-powered, real-time session monitoring helps stop insider threats and privileged attacks before they escalate.

‍

In this guide, you’ll learn:

• Why legacy session monitoring isn’t enough
• How advanced Privileged Session Management (PSM) works in real time
• What to look for in modern PSM tools
• How AI-driven session analysis reduces risk
• Where advanced PSM delivers the most value

‍

Picture this: It’s 3:12 a.m., and a compromised payroll admin’s account just got used in Kyiv…a location this employee has never visited. The attacker breezed past outdated MFA, having obtained the one-time code during a phishing attempt last week. Sensitive salary data vanishes, new direct-deposit details queue up, and it’s all discovered 194 days later (the average time it takes to detect a breach, according to IBM), long after unapproved payouts drain your budget. 

‍

Incidents like this aren’t edge cases; they’ve become the norm. Credential-based attacks jumped 71 percent in 2024, and 44 percent of employees still reuse passwords across personal and corporate accounts. Static defenses can’t keep up. They treat every login exactly the same, no matter where, when, or how it happens, leaving you with a painful dilemma: add more friction (and watch support tickets spike) or accept higher risk.

Risk-Based Authentication (RBA) ends that trade-off. Instead of forcing blanket MFA policies, RBA evaluates each login in real time and tailors the challenge to the actual threat level. Legitimate users pass through while suspicious logins face step-up verification or are blocked outright. 

In this article, we’ll break down everything you need to launch Risk-Based Authentication with confidence. 

‍

What is Risk-Based Authentication (RBA)?

Risk-Based Authentication (RBA) is a smarter way to verify user logins. Instead of handling every single sign-in with identical security challenges, an RBA engine decides on the fly whether you’re likely to be who you claim. 

‍

Many organizations already collect similar contextual telemetry inside identity or privileged-access tools. For instance, Segura’s PAM platform records device posture and session metadata every time an admin checks out a credential. RBA simply brings that context to the forefront of the login decision.

‍

Sometimes you’ll see RBA called “adaptive authentication,” but the principle remains the same: weigh each login’s context and act accordingly. Although RBA mainly focuses on the time of sign-in, many solutions keep watch for suspicious mid-session changes, tagging potential anomalies before they lead to a breach.

‍

How does Risk-Based Authentication work?

RBA works by assessing real-time contextual data and scoring how likely it is that a login attempt is genuine. Then it responds based on that risk. 

‍

The process involves multiple stages:

‍

Contextual data collection

As soon as a user enters their primary credentials, the system starts gathering contextual information. Here are a few factors that might get collected. 

Risk scoring

Those signals go into a smart engine, often powered by machine learning, which then figures out whether the login attempt is risky. Low scores mean “business as usual,” while high scores indicate red alerts that can get blocked or challenged.

‍

Adaptive response

Depending on the score, the RBA system decides how to react.

• Low risk: Primary credentials are accepted, and the user proceeds with minimal friction.
• Medium risk: RBA prompts a one-time code or another step-up challenge. 
• High risk: Access is rejected or needs stringent verification before proceeding.  

Some advanced RBA deployments also watch how users behave during sessions. If the behavior suddenly becomes suspicious, the system might require the user to reauthenticate.

‍

Key benefits of implementing RBA

Implementing RBA is far more than an incremental security improvement. It strengthens your security posture while improving the login experience.

• Enhanced Security Against Account Compromise: By analyzing context in real time, RBA catches suspicious behavior that static defenses would miss, cutting down on phishing and brute-force break-ins. Many organizations report around 50% fewer identity-related breaches with RBA.
• Frictionless User Experience: The biggest advantage of RBA is it challenges people only when necessary. Instead of an MFA prompt for every single login, only 8 to 10% of sign-ins need step-up factors – helping reduce MFA fatigue.
• Operational Efficiency: This means cost savings in both support tickets and security responses. When RBA hooks into a PAM solution like Segura, privileged sessions inherit risk scores automatically, so help-desk staff spend less time managing emergency ‘break-glass’ access (emergency override access) and security teams can focus on actual threats.
• Compliance Support: RBA supports compliance with frameworks like GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI-DSS by demonstrating adaptive, risk-aware security. NIST’s digital identity guidelines explicitly call out RBA as a recommended approach.
• Secure Remote Work: RBA evaluates logins based on real-time context rather than static assumptions about device or location, making it ideal for hybrid work and BYOD environments.

‍

Strategic planning for RBA implementation

Deploying RBA requires careful planning and clear organizational alignment. Effective RBA implementations start with clearly defined objectives, thoughtful assessment of organizational readiness, and careful solution selection. 

‍

Here’s how to structure your strategy to ensure your RBA deployment is successful.

‍

Defining objectives, scope, and use cases

Begin by clearly articulating what you want to achieve with RBA. Specific objectives might include reducing account takeover incidents, improving login experience, protecting high-value applications, or meeting compliance requirements. 

Define measurable goals like “Reduce fraudulent account access by 80%” or “Maintain step-up challenges under 5% of logins.”

Next, determine implementation scope. Will RBA be rolled out for workforce logins, customer applications, or both? Which authentication flows should incorporate risk evaluation? Prioritize areas of highest risk or value, such as privileged accounts and remote access portals. For each use case, define authentication policies in business terms, creating scenario-based requirements that will later translate to technical rules.

Assessing organizational readiness

Is your organization ready for RBA? Evaluate based on the following factors: 

Data readiness: RBA requires contextual data points like device information, geolocation, and login history. Assess whether your infrastructure captures these signals and maintains sufficient historical data to establish baselines.

Technical infrastructure: Review your authentication architecture, including identity providers, VPN solutions, and application authentication flows. Many modern IAM platforms have built-in RBA capabilities or APIs for integration. Determine whether you’ll leverage existing features or need to integrate third-party solutions.

Organizational readiness: Consider the human factor. Do you have the expertise to manage an RBA system? Ensure stakeholder buy-in from leadership, security operations, and IT support teams who will handle alerts and support cases related to RBA.

Choosing the right RBA solution

No single RBA tool fits all use cases. Some organizations might just flip on RBA in their existing IAM suite, while others may need a standalone engine for advanced correlation and machine learning capabilities.  

‍

Here are some factors that can help you decide what’s the right fit for your organization: 

‍

Integration capabilities

Will this plug easily into your current identity provider? If you already run Segura for privileged access, see whether your RBA engine can consume its session telemetry via API. 

‍

Risk model sophistication

Do you want a rule-based approach that you can manually tweak, or do you prefer a black-box ML system that “just works”? 

‍

Policy flexibility

Make sure you can craft specific rules for different user groups. 

‍

User experience

Which MFA forms do you want to offer? Push notifications, tokens, biometrics, or FIDO2 keys?  

‍

Scalability and performance

Check that your RBA solution can handle peak workloads without slowing user logins.

‍

Step-by-step implementation guide

Think of RBA as a strategic shift rather than just another tacked-on security feature. It can genuinely improve your security posture…but only if you plan carefully and feed it good data.

Phase 1: Data collection & integration

Imagine your authentication system as a doorkeeper who needs to quickly evaluate each visitor. Without proper information, even the most vigilant guard makes poor decisions. 

Your first mission is to give your system the right signals to interpret.

Integrate RBA into authentication flow:  If your existing IAM supports conditional access or risk evaluation, enable those. Otherwise, configure APIs to call a standalone RBA engine at login.  

Set up data feeds: Ensure the system receives all relevant context signals. Connect to directories for user attributes, device management solutions for device health, and threat intelligence feeds if applicable. For browser-based logins, implement JavaScript for device fingerprinting. Configure any additional integrations needed for geolocation or IP reputation services.

Don’t forget privileged credentials: Integrating Segura’s audit stream with the RBA engine allows you to flag logins that immediately pivot to high-risk commands.

Establish baseline monitoring: Run the RBA engine in a quiet mode for a week or two, gathering risk scores without enforcing them. This helps you see normal versus abnormal behavior before you start challenging users.  

Configure high availability: Decide if you fail-open (grant login if the RBA service is down) or fail-closed (block everyone if risk checks fail). Each option has trade-offs between user impact and security.

‍

Phase 2: Policy definition & configuration

Now it’s time to determine how your system interprets the signals it receives. This isn’t merely about technical configuration. It’s about encoding your organization’s security philosophy into actionable rules.

Define risk scoring rules: Configure how the system should assess risk factors based on your baseline data and organizational priorities. 

For example, you might set rules like “IP address from new country AND new device adds +30 risk” or “Executive group logins from outside headquarters are at least medium risk.” 

Review default weightings and adjust to fit your environment, perhaps lowering geolocation significance for users who travel frequently.

Set risk thresholds: Decide how to categorize low, medium, and high risk. If you set the bar too high, everyone gets challenged. If you set it too low, you may allow suspicious logins. 

Configure adaptive responses: Map each risk level to specific actions. 

Typically, you’d: 

• Allow low-risk logins with primary credentials only. 
• Require step-up authentication for medium risk.
• Block or impose stringent verification for high risk. 

Set up the step-up mechanisms, whether push notifications, OTP codes, or biometric verification.

Handle special cases: Implement exception rules for specific scenarios, perhaps all privileged account logins require MFA regardless of risk, or certain service accounts need alternative approaches. 

Configure handling for new users with no historical baseline, and establish procedures for planned exceptions like business travel.

Define user messaging: Present clear messages like “We need additional verification” rather than cryptic error codes. Transparent comms help users understand increased security steps.

‍

Phase 3: User behavior modeling & tuning

Security systems protect humans, but are often defeated by human behavior. This phase is where your RBA implementation learns to distinguish between unusual but legitimate access and actual threats.

Conduct pilot rollout: Before you deploy RBA across the organization, enable full RBA (with challenges) for a controlled group, perhaps the IT department or a volunteer pilot team. 

This limited scope allows you to observe how the system performs with real users while minimizing potential disruption. Pay close attention to how many logins trigger MFA, how well users understand the prompts, and whether any genuine security events are detected.

Refine user behavior models: If your solution uses machine learning, allow time for the system to learn normal patterns for each user. 

During this period, encourage pilot users to follow their typical login routines so the system can establish accurate baselines. As normal behavior is modeled, risk scores for routine logins should decrease.

Tune based on feedback: Analyze both quantitative data and qualitative feedback to refine your configuration. If legitimate logins frequently trigger medium-risk responses, investigate why; perhaps certain factors need adjustment. 

For example, if developers regularly use different machines, device novelty shouldn’t be heavily penalized for that group. Conversely, if suspicious attempts aren’t properly flagged, strengthen relevant factors.

Address false positives/negatives: Examine any security incidents that RBA should have detected but didn’t, and incorporate those lessons into your model. Similarly, identify and address patterns causing unnecessary challenges for specific user groups.

Document and communicate: Keep an internal knowledge base with current risk rules and known behaviors. Prepare communication material explaining the new authentication approach and set appropriate expectations before broader rollout.

‍

Phase 4: Testing, rollout & monitoring

With a refined configuration and lessons from your pilot internalized, you’re ready to expand protection across your organization. 

‍

Implement phased rollout: Using insights from the pilot, gradually expand RBA enforcement, perhaps department by department or application by application. Monitor each expansion phase for unexpected issues before proceeding to the next group. 

Conduct comprehensive testing: Before fully enabling RBA for critical services, test various scenarios: normal logins, clearly risky attempts, and edge cases. Verify that step-up prompts work correctly across all platforms, test failure cases and recovery procedures, and validate administrative functions like override capabilities and logging.

Establish monitoring and alerting: Create dashboards tracking key metrics: authentication volumes, risk distributions, challenge rates, and block events. Configure alerts for potential attack patterns (multiple high-risk attempts at one account) or system issues (sudden changes in risk distribution). Integrate RBA logs with your SIEM for correlation with other security events.

Develop incident procedures: Create clear protocols for handling RBA-related events. Define how support staff should verify identity when legitimate users are blocked, and establish security team responses when suspicious access attempts are detected. Incorporate RBA signals into your broader security incident response workflow.

Implement continuous improvement: Schedule regular reviews of RBA performance, using metrics to identify opportunities for refinement. As business conditions evolve (work patterns change, new threats emerge), adjust policies accordingly. When expanding to new applications or user groups, repeat the tuning process for those contexts.

‍

RBA implementation best practices

A successful RBA rollout doesn’t end with deployment. It requires ongoing refinement and proactive management to remain effective against evolving threats. 

‍

Below are some best practices drawn from organizations that have successfully embedded RBA into their security DNA.

Establish clear metrics: Define and track KPIs for both security (prevented breaches, blocked suspicious attempts) and user experience (challenge rates, login success). Set target ranges to guide ongoing tuning.

Feed rich data sources: You’ll get better detection if you keep feeding your RBA engine updated intelligence about user roles, device posture, and potential threat sources.  

Continuously tune the system: RBA is not “set-and-forget” security. Regularly review performance metrics and adjust policies as threat landscapes and business conditions evolve. Simulate attack scenarios to verify effectiveness, and incorporate feedback from security incidents to strengthen detection capabilities.

Layer with other controls: Complement RBA with a broader security mesh, like mandatory MFA for admin accounts or integration with Zero Trust. RBA signals can feed a Zero Trust model, stepping up scrutiny whenever something looks off.  

Ensure transparency: Let employees know they may see extra prompts if their login behavior changes, to keep them from feeling blindsided. Establish straightforward support processes for when legitimate users encounter difficulties.

Handle exceptions gracefully: Create procedures for special situations like business travel or temporary device changes. Implement time-bound exceptions with appropriate approvals rather than permanent bypasses. Document all exceptions and review them periodically to prevent security gaps.

Protect privacy: Don’t forget compliance around data minimization and retention. Device and location logs can be sensitive, so enforce suitable retention schedules and encryption.

‍

How to integrate RBA into your security ecosystem

Risk-Based Authentication isn’t a standalone solution. It thrives when fully integrated into your broader security ecosystem. 

‍

For example, Segura’s just-in-time session brokering can pass a ‘privileged-session’ flag to your RBA policy, automatically raising the risk floor before the admin even reaches the vault.

Identity and Access Management (IAM): Implement RBA at the IAM level so all federated applications benefit from contextual risk assessment. When using Single Sign-On, enable RBA in the SSO flow to provide consistent protection across connected applications. Exchange identity information bidirectionally, user status changes from IAM should influence RBA policies, while RBA risk signals can trigger IAM actions like forced password resets.

Zero Trust Architecture: Position RBA as a key component of Zero Trust by providing continuous, context-aware identity verification. Integrate with ZTNA (Zero Trust Network Access) solutions to combine device posture and identity risk into unified access decisions. Configure RBA to re-evaluate sessions periodically, aligning with the “never trust, always verify” principle by challenging users when context changes significantly during active sessions.

Privileged Access Management (PAM): Apply enhanced RBA scrutiny to privileged operations. When administrators access sensitive systems or retrieve credentials from vaults, contextual risk assessment can identify unusual access patterns that might indicate compromise. Configure stricter thresholds for admin accounts, potentially requiring additional verification or approval for high-risk privileged sessions.

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and SOAR: Feed RBA events to your SIEM for correlation with other security signals. Configure alerts when multiple high-risk login attempts occur across different accounts from the same source, potentially indicating coordinated attacks. Integrate with SOAR platforms to automate responses, for example, triggering account lockouts or security team notifications when suspicious patterns emerge. Create bidirectional integration where SIEM/UEBA insights about unusual user behavior can influence risk scores for subsequent authentication attempts.

Customer Identity and Fraud Systems: For consumer-facing applications, integrate RBA with fraud detection platforms to create a unified risk view. Combine authentication context with transaction patterns so suspicious account behavior (like unusual purchases or profile changes) can trigger step-up challenges before sensitive operations complete.

‍

The future of Risk-Based Authentication

RBA’s going to keep evolving as AI tools get smarter and more embedded in authentication systems. With machine learning becoming sharper at picking out unusual activity, we’ll likely see fewer false alarms interrupting legitimate users. Take behavioral biometrics, for instance, tracking nuanced user habits like typing speed or subtle mouse gestures could soon quietly double-check identities behind the scenes throughout a user’s session.

‍

One shift worth keeping track of is real-time threat intelligence sharing, where organizations swap security signals in the moment. Think of it like a neighborhood watch – when compromised passwords turn up in leaked databases or suspicious activity is spotted elsewhere, organizations can immediately tighten their own authentication policies in response. It’s a bit like how banks quickly alert each other to prevent fraud when someone tries using a stolen credit card.

‍

We’re probably heading into an era where the clear-cut distinction between that initial login check and continuous security monitoring starts to fade. Instead of just validating a user once at sign-in, risk assessment will likely follow the user during their entire interaction, adjusting the trust level based on device data, sensor inputs, and session behavior. So, rather than giving users a free pass post-login, organizations will continuously re-confirm their identity, making security more fluid and dynamic.

‍

Ultimately, expect systems themselves to become more dynamic, adjusting authentication factors on the fly depending on the exact context and risk profile of each transaction. Imagine you’re logging in from a coffee shop’s Wi-Fi for the first time. In a situation like this, RBA might prompt additional verification automatically, even if you’re using a familiar security key or fingerprint.

‍

Don’t wait for a breach – take action today

Risk-Based Authentication represents a fundamental shift from static checkpoints to intelligent, adaptive security. By adopting RBA, your organization can significantly reduce the risk of credential-based threats, streamline user experience, and eliminate the outdated trade-off between security and usability.

But effective RBA doesn’t happen by accident – it requires the right tools and a trusted partner. Segura simplifies this transition with robust, ready-to-implement features like real-time session monitoring, contextual policy controls, and Continuous Identification: a built-in capability that dynamically validates user identity throughout the session. These features integrate seamlessly with your existing systems to deliver stronger security without added friction.
‍

For many organizations, cybersecurity has historically been seen as a necessary expense, like an insurance policy, rather than a strategic investment. But that outdated mindset is shifting rapidly. In today’s hyper-connected world, effective security is a business enabler. It accelerates digital transformation, safeguards productivity, protects revenue, and, when approached strategically, drives measurable cost savings in cybersecurity.

Forward-thinking organizations are now optimizing their cybersecurity budget through smarter investments, tool consolidation, and security automation, transforming security from a cost center into a value driver.

As one security leader put it:

“The conversation changes when you translate security risks into business terms such as business downtime, revenue impact, regulatory exposure. That’s when security becomes not just about protection, but a core part of how the business stays productive and competitive.”

‍

Beyond Protection: Enabling Business Continuity and Resilience

Security teams are often asked to report on patch rates, incident detection times, or technical vulnerabilities. These metrics, while important for the security team, rarely resonate at the executive or board level unless translated into business outcomes.

The real question executives care about is simple: “If something goes wrong, how quickly can we detect it, contain it, and recover, and what does that mean for the business?”

Containing an incident quickly can be the difference between a minor disruption and a multi-million-dollar crisis. One security leader drew a parallel from their experience in emergency services:

“When somebody calls the emergency number, how quickly can you get help to that person, which can be the difference between life and death? That’s a massive service-level commitment. It’s the same with cyber incidents. Faster detection and response mean reduced impact and faster recovery.”

This is why modern security strategies emphasize not just prevention, but detection, containment, and recovery, all directly tied to business resilience.

‍

Aligning Security with Business Priorities

The fundamental question executives care about isn’t technical; it’s risk, legal, operational, and financial:

• How does security help keep services running?
• How does it reduce risk without slowing the business down?
• How can we achieve cybersecurity cost savings without increasing exposure?
• How do we make the most of our cybersecurity budget in a resource-constrained environment?

‍

To answer these, security leaders are embracing risk-based budgeting but prioritizing investments that directly reduce business risk and support critical operations, rather than spreading resources thin across low-impact areas.
‍

“Risk-based budgeting helps us avoid spending on security for security’s sake. It focuses us on what actually protects the business and drives value, leading to a return on investment.”

‍

Tool Consolidation and Security Automation: Doing More with Less

The average enterprise security stack has grown bloated and complex, with overlapping tools, redundant functionality, and spiraling costs. Not only is this expensive, but it also slows response times and creates operational blind spots.  Managing a multitude of tools presents a significant resource challenge, hindering the team’s ability to develop the necessary skills and knowledge for effective oversight and visibility.

‍

Tool consolidation addresses this challenge head-on, streamlining security operations, reducing vendor complexity, and unlocking efficiency gains.
‍

By consolidating platforms and introducing security automation, organizations can:

✔ Reduce tool sprawl and associated costs
✔ Improve visibility and control
✔ Accelerate incident detection and response
✔ Free up security teams to focus on higher-value tasks
✔ Drive measurable cybersecurity cost savings
‍

“Tool consolidation and automation aren’t just about saving money, though they do that. They improve resilience and keep the business moving by making security more efficient and less reactive.”

‍

Legacy Technology Divestment: Reducing Risk and Cost

Outdated, unsupported, or redundant technologies introduce both security vulnerabilities and hidden operational costs. Yet many organizations hesitate to part ways with legacy systems due to perceived complexity or sunk costs.

However, strategic legacy technology divestment delivers significant benefits:

• Reduced attack surface and security risk
• Lower maintenance and licensing costs
• Simplified technology architecture
• Greater agility and scalability
• Alignment with modern security and compliance standards

‍

As security leaders increasingly tie technology decisions to business outcomes, shedding outdated systems becomes a key component of both risk reduction and cybersecurity cost savings.

“Clinging to legacy technology isn’t just a technical debt issue; it’s a business risk. And divesting from it is often one of the fastest ways to cut costs and improve security.”

‍

The Domino Effect of Poor Access Management

Many of the most damaging breaches share a common root cause: weak or unmanaged access controls typically related to identities and credentials.

‍

Whether it’s stolen credentials sold for a few dollars on the dark web or privileged access abuse, attackers exploit identity gaps as their easiest entry point. From there, poor internal controls, such as a lack of network segmentation or weak separation of duties, allow them to escalate privileges, move laterally, and access critical systems.

“It’s literally a domino effect. That initial access is the first domino falling. But the last domino could be your ERP system, your customer data, or your intellectual property, and when that last domino falls, the business impact is massive.”

‍

By managing access more effectively, including privileged accounts, third-party access, and machine identities, organizations not only reduce their risk but also improve operational efficiency and simplify regulatory compliance.

‍

Predicting the Shift: Cyber Accountability in the Boardroom

Regulatory changes, such as new disclosure requirements, are forcing security into sharper boardroom focus. Leaders predict that organizations will face tougher scrutiny, not just on whether incidents occur, but on how well access controls, credential management, and privileged user rights are governed.

This creates both a challenge and an opportunity. Security leaders who can proactively frame these controls as business enablers protecting critical services, enabling faster recovery, and safeguarding productivity will be seen not as blockers, but as strategic contributors.

The key is to avoid overwhelming executives with technical details. Instead:

✅ Keep the conversation business-centric
✅ Explain how controls directly support operational continuity
✅ Connect risks and security investments to measurable business outcomes
✅ Demonstrate readiness through realistic scenarios and response plans

As one leader advised:
‍

“There’s going to be a tug of war. In calm times, you keep it macro, business-focused. But in a crisis, boards will dive into the weeds asking detailed questions like, ‘How did we let this happen?’ Be prepared for both.”

‍

The Future of Security as a Competitive Advantage

Modern security isn’t about saying no, it’s about enabling the business to move faster, innovate confidently, and stay productive, all while managing risk.

Organizations that embrace risk-based budgeting, pursue tool consolidation, leverage security automation, and commit to legacy technology divestment are finding they can both improve security and achieve real, measurable cybersecurity cost savings.

Security, when aligned to business goals, does more than reduce risk. It:

✔ Supports faster, safer digital transformation
✔ Enables employees to work productively and securely
✔ Reduces downtime and the financial impact of incidents
✔ Builds customer confidence and market credibility
✔ Enhances the organization’s ability to adapt, recover, and grow
‍

“We’ll never eliminate all risk, but we can align security to the business, reduce costs, improve resilience, and make security a true competitive advantage.”

Bottom Line: Security isn’t just about protecting the business. It’s about enabling it to operate, innovate, and grow safely, confidently, and with resilience built in.

Segura® is proud to announce the launch of version 4.0, a major step forward in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) user experience. With a fully redesigned interface and tighter module integration, Segura® 4.0 gives you complete visibility across the platform and a faster, more efficient All-In-One experience.
‍

Segura® 4.0 was built with a sharp focus on simplicity, efficiency, and personalization. It’s engineered to transform how you secure your most critical assets.
‍

We designed this version for the teams who are short on time, tired of complexity, and ready for security that just works.

Our goal: Make every interaction intuitive and valuable to your daily work. Security doesn’t need to be so complex. Keep reading to see how Segura® 4.0 proves that.

 

What’s New in Segura® 4.0?

These updates were designed to save you time, reduce friction, and give your team more control right from day one.

‍

Navigate Faster with a Clean, Modern Interface

Redesigned icons and standardized visuals create a more consistent, intuitive experience. Menus have been restructured for faster, more intuitive navigation so you can find what you need in seconds.

Customize Your View with a Drag-and-Drop Dashboard

Security management made easy. Customized, easy-to-use dashboards help you prioritize what matters most when managing your credentials, optimizing your time and decision-making.

Simplify Workflows with Step-by-Step Registration Wizards

No more complex forms – the registration process is now an intuitive, easy-to-follow, step-by-step guide. Registering credentials and third parties is now divided into simple, direct stages, guided by a Wizard, to fit right into your workflow.

Stay Ahead with a Centralized Notification Center

All alerts and updates from Segura® are now centralized in a single panel, making it easier to identify necessary actions and respond quickly to critical events.

Manage Credentials with the New Access Panel

The new Access Panel simplifies credential management with optimized filters and a more intuitive interface, so you can access and manage information quickly and directly. Detailed history is now available directly in the panel, making auditing processes even easier.

Find What You Need Faster with Enhanced Global Search

Search across the entire platform with improved speed, flexibility, and precision.

Features include:

• Keyboard shortcuts for quick actions
• Cross-module search with no limits
• Search history tracking
• Partial-term search to find results faster

Stay Compliant with Built-In Access Recertification

Automatically verify that only the right people have the right access; no manual tracking needed.

Segura® 4.0 is the only traditional PAM solution with native privileged access recertification, helping you improve compliance, visibility, and operational control.

Unveiling the Invisible: Master Machine Identities and Elevate Your Organization’s Security

The most dangerous threats are often the ones we can’t see. In today’s complex, automated environments, machine identities—SSH keys, certificates, service credentials, cloud keys, and Kubernetes secrets—work quietly behind the scenes, granting access to critical systems and data.

But when these identities aren’t properly managed, they become security blind spots—creating openings for serious attacks. The good news? Segura® Platform 4.0 brings them into focus and puts you back in control.

With our new Machine Identities module, you get a unified, consolidated view of every non-human identity in your organization.

Imagine a centralized report that pulls data from multiple sources and shows you ownership, management status, and the last update for every identity clearly and in one place.

This update redefines how you protect your most valuable assets by making non-human access visible, trackable, and fully controlled.

Forget the spreadsheets and manual tracking. Segura® 4.0 gives you a complete, integrated solution to manage machine identities with clarity, speed, and confidence.

Request a demo today and see how this new module helps you eliminate hidden risks, maintain control, and protect business continuity.

Why Choose Segura® 4.0 for Privileged Access Management?

Segura® 4.0 represents a major step forward in how teams manage privileged access.

As an Information Security Architect from one of our partner companies put it: 

“I’d recommend Segura® for its ease of use, quick deployment, and local Brazilian support. It doesn’t take much technical effort to get it up and running, and the usability is excellent. It’s an everyday tool for our team.”

With a focus on user experience, personalization, and operational efficiency, the latest version is built to simplify your routine and strengthen your security posture. That means faster actions, less time spent on training, and full visibility of your most critical assets.
‍

Curious to see it in action?
Experience how Segura® 4.0 makes enterprise-grade security feel intuitive and powerful. Request your free demo today.

‍

In today’s digital-first world, the way we manage identities has never been more critical. As hybrid workforces expand and regulations tighten, organizations are increasingly looking to modernize their Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) systems—not just to stay compliant, but to stay secure and agile.

Recently, I had an interview with a seasoned identity expert from a global retail manufacturing giant who joined the conversation to unpack the evolution of IGA, share real-world challenges, and explore where the industry is heading next.

Here are the top takeaways from that insightful discussion.
‍
‍

‍What Is IGA and Why Does It Matter Today?

Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) isn’t new. Traditionally, it’s been focused on provisioning access, handling joiners/movers/leavers, and enforcing separation of duties. Where Identity and Access Management (IAM) covers the broader picture of who has access to what, IGA zeroes in on how that access is granted, monitored, and revoked.

Historically, IGA was reserved for large enterprises with deep pockets. But events like the Enron scandal pushed IGA into the spotlight, making it essential for compliance and corporate accountability. Today, identity governance must support not only employees but also dynamic workforces, contractors, and even non-human identities across sprawling digital ecosystems.

‍

Where Traditional IGA Falls Short

Despite its benefits, legacy IGA systems often struggle with real-world complexity:

• Fragmented Stakeholders: HR, IT, security, and compliance teams all rely on IGA, but often have conflicting priorities.
• Slow Deprovisioning: Many organizations excel at onboarding new users but lag at removing access when roles change or users leave.
• Inconsistent Ownership: IGA often floats between departments—sometimes under the CSO, other times under GRC or IT—making it difficult to drive a cohesive strategy.
• Signal-to-Noise Overload: As IGA systems evolve toward Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR), the challenge becomes separating meaningful signals from massive volumes of data.

‍

‍

How IGA Is Modernizing

The good news? IGA is undergoing a major transformation.

‍

1. Cloud-First, Agile Architectures

Cloud-native IGA platforms have matured significantly. Ten years ago, they were lightweight and limited. Today, they often outpace their on-prem counterparts in speed, features, and ease of adoption. Organizations can now test features in private previews and toggle capabilities with the flip of a switch—an impossible feat in traditional setups.

‍

2. Security-First Integration

Modern IGA is becoming more intertwined with ITDR and threat prevention. This includes signals from endpoint detection, phishing-resistant MFA such as passkeys and hardware tokens, and behavioral analytics. However, challenges persist—especially in stitching together data from different vendors without standardized orchestration tools.

‍

3. Adaptive, Fine-Grained Access Controls

The move from static policies to adaptive, context-aware permissions is a game-changer. Attribute- and policy-based access controls (ABAC/PBAC) enable organizations to grant just-in-time, least-privilege access that adapts to changing conditions. Think: access that aligns with peer groups, behavior norms, or real-time risk scores.

‍

4. AI-Powered Efficiency

AI is taking center stage in automating onboarding, role modeling, and access certification. Rather than relying on exhaustive manual interviews to determine who needs what, AI can analyze historical data and suggest policies based on similar roles or behaviors, freeing up valuable analyst time and reducing risk.

‍

What’s Next: From People to Bots

The identity leader from the retail manufacturing company shared a clear vision of what’s ahead:

• Expanding Beyond Employees: Extending IGA to cover business partners and vendors, not just full-time staff.
• Managing Non-Human Identities (NHIs): From service accounts to AI agents, organizations must bring these entities under governance.
• Combatting Shadow IT/AI: Just like shadow IT introduced risks a decade ago, unsanctioned AI tools are the next blind spot. IGA must adapt.
• Orchestration of ITDR: As identity signals become more diverse, orchestration platforms that unify those signals will become critical.

‍

Community + Collaboration = Better Security

One of the best ways to keep up with this rapidly evolving landscape? Community.

From industry conferences like Gartner IAM and EIC to informal meetups like Identity Beers, connecting with peers helps professionals learn what’s working, what’s not, and where innovation is headed. Our guest emphasized that even a single conversation can replace weeks of research or pilot testing.

‍

Final Thoughts

IGA is no longer a “nice-to-have” compliance tool. It’s a strategic enabler of security, productivity, and digital agility. The organizations that embrace modern, flexible, and AI-driven identity governance are best positioned to thrive in today’s dynamic threat landscape.

Whether you’re just starting your IGA journey or looking to modernize an existing program, the time to act is now.

‍

Stay safe, stay informed, and keep your identities governed.