A connector functions as a specialized software component that translates the IGA platform’s generalized commands (e.g., “assign role”) into the specific protocol and data format required by a target system (e.g., a specific API call or LDAP modification). It bridges the gap between abstract policy and technical implementation, enabling automated, auditable, and consistent governance. Without connectors, an IGA platform would be unable to perform its core functions of visibility and control over the enterprise IT environment.

The Core Functions of a Connector

Connectors facilitate a continuous cycle of governance through three primary functions: aggregation, provisioning, and verification.

1. Aggregation (The “Read” Function) 

Aggregation, also known as reconciliation, is the process of pulling identity, account, and entitlement data from a target system into the IGA platform. This foundational function builds and maintains a centralized, unified view of access rights across the organization. This data is essential for:

•  Visibility and Reporting: Providing a single source of truth for who has access to what.
•  Access Certifications: Supplying managers and asset owners with the data needed to conduct periodic access reviews.
•  Policy Evaluation: Detecting access that violates established policies, such as Separation of Duties (SoD).

2. Provisioning (The “Write” Function) 

Provisioning is the process of executing commands from the IGA platform onto the target system to grant, modify, or revoke access. Triggered by identity lifecycle events (e.g., joiner, mover, leaver), provisioning automates access changes. The connector translates a logical request from the IGA platform into the precise technical operations required by the target system, such as:

•  Create: Creating a new user account.
•  Update: Modifying user attributes or adding/removing entitlements (e.g., roles, group memberships).
•  Delete/Disable: Deactivating or deleting an account upon user departure to remove access promptly.

3. Near-real-time Verification (The “Check” Function) 

After a provisioning action is sent, a robust connector performs verification. It queries the target system to confirm that the requested change was successfully applied. This closed-loop reconciliation is critical for maintaining data integrity and providing a reliable audit trail, ensuring that the state recorded in the IGA platform accurately reflects the permissions in the target system.

Connector Implementation Models

Because no two enterprise environments are alike, connectors are available in two primary models:

•  Out-of-the-Box (OOTB): These are pre-built, vendor-supported connectors designed for common commercial and enterprise systems (e.g., Microsoft Entra ID, Salesforce, SAP). They are generally preferred for their rapid deployment, reliability, and ongoing maintenance by the vendor.
•  Custom: For homegrown applications, legacy systems, or niche platforms without OOTB support, custom connectors must be developed. They extend governance to all critical assets but require an initial development investment and ongoing maintenance by the organization.

The Connector Framework: Enabling Scalable and Customized Integration

Modern IGA platforms include a Common Connector Framework (CCF) to standardize and accelerate the development of custom connectors. Rather than building from scratch, developers use the framework to apply business-specific logic to pre-built templates that handle common protocols (e.g., REST/SOAP, SCIM, SQL).

•  Aggregation Rules: Custom logic can be used to transform inbound data into a consistent format for the IGA platform. This includes normalizing data (e.g., mapping location codes to full names) or correlating low-level permissions into a single, business-friendly entitlement.
•  Provisioning Rules: Custom logic can translate a single IGA directive into a complex series of operations required by the target system. For example, a “Create User” event can trigger a rule that executes multiple, sequential API calls to build an account, assign a profile, and set initial security parameters.

The Evolution to Intelligent Connectors

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) is transforming connectors from procedural intermediaries into intelligent agents that enhance governance.

Key AI-Driven Capabilities:

•  Intelligent Aggregation and Role Mining: AI algorithms can analyze aggregated entitlement data to discover hidden access patterns, identify orphaned accounts, and recommend optimized business roles based on usage and clustering.
•  Predictive and Risk-Based Provisioning: ML models can predict the access a new user will likely require based on peer analysis, accelerating onboarding. They can also assess the real-time risk of an access request and trigger step-up authentication or additional approvals before the connector executes the change.
•  Self-Healing and Adaptive Operations: An intelligent connector can autonomously handle transient failures (e.g., by retrying a command if a target system is temporarily unavailable) and detect API changes in SaaS applications to flag potential integration failures before they occur.
• Behavioral Analytics (UBA): By analyzing logs and usage data, AI can establish a baseline of normal user activity. Deviations from this baseline can trigger an alert, an automated access review, or a temporary suspension of access via the connector, enabling a shift from periodic to continuous, risk-based access verification.

Key Considerations for Advanced Connectors: The efficacy of AI-driven IGA depends on high-quality data. Organizations must also address challenges related to model explainability for auditors, the potential for perpetuating historical bias, and the added complexity of implementation.

Conclusion

Connectors are a foundational component of any IGA architecture. They are the essential infrastructure that translates policy into practice. The evolution of connectors—from standard OOTB integrations to customizable frameworks and, ultimately, to AI-enhanced intelligent agents—is critical for enabling organizations to build a proactive, secure, and efficient identity governance program capable of addressing the challenges of the modern digital enterprise.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the content are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDPro organization.

About the author

Mr. Anant Wairagade is an internationally recognized Senior Cybersecurity Engineer and independent researcher with a Bachelor of Engineering in Computer Science. His expertise lies in a niche and highly visible field within the software industry: enterprise-scale identity and access management, with a particular emphasis on cloud security, zero-trust architectures, and the application of artificial intelligence. His significant contributions to this field, demonstrated through his publications, technical program committee work, and impactful achievements at American Express and other major corporations, have earned him a reputation as an expert in a specialized area.

The post IGA Connectors: The Bridge Between Policy and Execution appeared first on IDPro.

Identity and Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines the concept of recognition as a person before the law as a fundamental human right. Digital identity is a new aspect of that fundamental right, a topic covered by Elizabeth Garber and Mark Haine in the white paper “Human-Centric Digital Identity: for Government Officials.” This right has also inspired the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Model Governance Framework for Digital Legal Identity System. 

Source: UNDP Digital Legal ID Governance website – https://www.governance4id.org/ 

Digital Identity and the United Nations

It might seem like a big stretch to go from our day-to-day worries about our IAM systems to a governance framework designed for governments worldwide to adapt as they build their digital identity programs, but it’s happening. The UNDP argues that there is a significant social and economic benefit for governments to digitize their identity programs and close the identity gap. Just in financial services alone, a strong digital public infrastructure is expected to speed up growth by 20-33%. 

Think about it. Our little corner of the world, which focuses on a specialty so young you almost certainly don’t have a degree in it, is now a core aspect of global economic growth!

Eight Core Themes

So, what does the UNDP’s framework look like? As expected of the UN, they are taking a broad approach that considers all elements of society. Specifically, they offer guidance on:

• Equality and Non-Discrimination
• Accountability and the Rule of Law
• Legal and Regulatory Framework
• Capable Institutions
• Data Protection and Privacy
• User Value
• Procurement and Anti-Corruption
• Participation and Access to Information

The UNDP model comes from their legal identity AND digital public infrastructure efforts, which is the right combination of organizations to bring together. Digital transformation is a bit of a buzzword, and yet, that’s what is happening. The UNDP is trying to help provide some guidance so countries are at least somewhat going in the same direction. They’ve already noted that there are at least as many failed identity programs as successful ones, usually because of inadequate governance. 

Digital identity always comes down to governance.

Applying the Framework

We can always learn from others, and we have an opportunity, regardless of what sector we work in, to learn from the UNDP framework. While targeted towards governments and civil society, there is quite a bit here that the public sector can apply to their IGA programs. The need to take into account as a foundational principle the need to support equity and diversity is one example. Another is ensuring the systems and programs are adequately funded and clear of undue influence. 

Wrap Up

So why is this a Letter from Leadership post (which we’re also posting to the blog)? Because identity governance is our space and everyone in this organization has an opportunity to be a leader in ensuring the identity programs they are part of are well-designed and developed. So, as one leader to the next (that’s you), I hope you take a few moments to think about this bigger picture and how you can make the governance of the identity systems around you better.

Author

Heather Flanagan, Acting Executive Director and Principal Editor for IDPro (and Principal at Spherical Cow Consulting) comes from a position that the Internet is led by people, powered by words, and inspired by technology. She has been involved in leadership roles with some of the most technical, volunteer-driven organizations on the Internet, including the IETF, IAB, and IRTF as RFC Series Editor, ICANN as a Technical Writer, and REFEDS as Coordinator, just to name a few. If there is work going on to develop new Internet standards, or discussions around the future of digital identity, she is interested in engaging in that work.

The post Identity and Human Rights appeared first on IDPro.

The conference this year will have a particular focus on Trust, which the Oxford English Dictionary primarily defines as a “Firm belief in the reliability, truth, or ability of someone or something; confidence or faith in a person or thing, or in an attribute of a person or thing.”

Questions of trust lie at the very foundation of our identity systems.  We trust standards bodies to develop protocols that will be useful, practical and secure.  We trust developers and vendors to build products, solutions and services that will implement those standards in performant, scalable and extensible ways.  We trust providers to deliver robust services that we and our customers can rely on.   We trust executives to listen and to support and fund the crucial work that we do.  And, of course, we develop and implement mitigations in case our trust is misplaced.

But trust is broader than this; and trust goes both ways.  As consumers and as citizens, we would like to trust that organisations won’t collect information they don’t need; that they will handle that data safely and properly; that they will keep pace with rapidly evolving best-practices in identity, security and privacy.  A world in which that trust is not assured is an uncomfortable world at best; and many people today live, work or interact in circumstances which are not inherently trustworthy. 

The OED has a secondary definition of Trust.  “To take on (also upon) trust (formerly also †to take up in (also upon) trust  †to receive in trust and variants): to believe or accept a statement, story, etc., without seeking verification or evidence for it.” (Emphasis added).  

Over the past 24 months, we’ve seen an explosion in digital identity assurance and verification programs.  Mobile drivers’ licenses, COVID and other healthcare passes and certificates, digital boarding cards, facial recognition for age verification and in-store check-out… the list is long, and it is growing.  As a result, we’re also seeing an explosion of interest in governance and interoperability within and between use-cases and sectors: trust frameworks, attribute mapping and matching, account linking and more besides.

These advances hold great promise to make our lives more efficient and connected; to reduce friction, and fraud, and risk.  But a balance is needed, too.  Trust is a fragile thing—hard to gain, easy to lose, difficult to rebuild.  Organisations and institutions must take care not to overstep the bounds of our trust, lest they lose our engagement and, in the end, our support.

Trust is an important topic, but it’s certainly not the only issue of note in the industry!  The topic focus each year for Identiverse infuses but does not dictate the agenda and the event.  New and emerging standards and architectures; deployment stories and leading practices; identity for connected devices; new approaches to privacy, security, devops, engineering; sector-specific identity practices in healthcare, manufacturing, government, education, financial services and more; and specific identity-related disciplines like CIAM, auth’n, auth’z, self-sovereign, IGA…. That list barely scratches the surface: and your proposals on these and many other topics will inform and contribute to the agenda.

This year’s content committee and I look forward to seeing your proposals; and I trust that we’ll be able to get together in person in Denver in June.

Andrew Hindle

Independent Consultant, Board Member IDPro

Andrew is an independent consultant specialising in digital identity, cyber security and privacy. He is a founding member, and Chair of the Board, of IDPro; he participates as a voting member of the User Managed Access Working Group at Kantara; and he is an active member of the Open Identity Foundation (OIDF).  Since 2015, he has been Content Chair for Identiverse®. Andrew has over 20 years experience in the software industry in a range of technical sales, pre-sales, product marketing and business development roles. He maintains CIPP/E, CIPM and CIPT privacy certifications with the IAPP; a CIDPRO certification from IDPro; and holds a BA in Oriental Studies (Japanese) from Oxford University and an advanced professional diploma in corporate governance. Outside of the world of identity, Andrew is Chair of Trustees for his local scouting group, rides regularly with a local road cycling group, and plays keyboard, guitar and bassoon (not at the same time) with more enthusiasm than skill, and for an audience of one. Andrew is based in the UK.

The post Identiverse® 2022 appeared first on IDPro.