Why PAM and IGA leave a gap in real-time access, and how to fix it

Security teams rely on Privileged Access Management (PAM) and Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) to control who gets access to what. But here’s the problem: neither of them works in real time.

At first glance, PAM might feel real-time because users go through an approval process before getting access. But what’s actually happening is that they’re getting standing privileges - access that exists in advance and is simply gated by PAM controls. Similarly, some next-gen IGA tools claim to provide “real-time” access, but what they’re really doing is just-in-time (JIT) provisioning, meaning they create an account on demand but don’t take it away when it’s no longer needed.

The result? A security gap that leaves organizations exposed to unnecessary risk.

PAM: not as real-time as it seems

Let’s say it’s Wednesday, and I’m scheduled to be on-call this Friday. I need access to a critical system, so I submit a request through PAM. An executive has to approve it, and once they do, I have standing access for the designated time window.

This process isn’t real-time. It’s a request-based workflow, and the decision to grant access is happening well in advance of when I actually need it. Once the approval goes through, my access is there, whether or not I’m actually using it at that moment.

PAM’s job is to put a gate in front of privileged access, but it still operates with static approvals. Once you get the “keys,” you hold onto them until they expire, regardless of whether you still need them.

IGA and the illusion of real-time access

IGA tools primarily handle identity lifecycle management, like provisioning accounts, managing entitlements, and running access reviews. It’s access for everyone in the enterprise rather than something focused on privileged access. Some newer solutions advertise “real-time” access, but what they’re actually doing is JIT provisioning:

1. A user requests access to a system.
2. The system creates an account with the necessary entitlements.
3. The account exists until the pre-set expiration time.

This is still standing access, it’s just created on demand instead of pre-provisioned. It doesn’t adjust in real time if something changes, like a user switching roles or losing the need for access.

Most IGA solutions also don’t listen for signals from the broader security environment. If a user’s risk posture changes (say they suddenly log in from an unusual location or their endpoint security flags an issue) IGA won’t revoke access in response.

Bridging the gap with real-time decisions

The missing piece is real-time access that continuously evaluates context. Instead of granting standing privileges or time-bound entitlements, access should be dynamically determined based on business context, like:

• Is this person actually on-call right now?
• Do they have an active support ticket that requires access?
• Are they logging in from a secure corporate network?

SGNL fills this gap by making access decisions in real time, without requiring a human in the loop. Instead of pre-provisioning access, SGNL determines the right permissions for each individual session, then removes them when they’re no longer needed.

Think of it like AWS IAM roles. Users don’t get a static privileged account that exists indefinitely. Instead, SGNL dynamically assigns access based on policy, so users only have what they need while they need it… nothing more, nothing less.

The future of access control

PAM and IGA still play an important role in security, but they weren’t designed to provide real-time, context-aware access. That’s where SGNL comes in. By continuously evaluating business signals and enforcing policies dynamically, SGNL closes the gap that PAM and IGA leave behind—so organizations can move faster while staying secure.