One of the most widely read posts on this blog is my rant on entitlement management and Securent. If you've read it, you might have also noticed my "conversation" with their CEO Rajiv Gupta in the comments (incidentally, I never did get a response to the last email I sent him asking for a clarification - but I'm sure he has better things to do than debate the point with me...like marketing his product for example).
They've been getting more and more positive press coverage lately (here, here, here and here). And this week one of the louder voices in the identity community also jumped on the bandwagon. Dave Kearns made mention of Securent in this NetworkWorld article a few days ago. Again, it was positive.
I'll say one thing. Their marketing department is doing a great job of positioning Securent in a positive light in the marketplace. I have yet to see any negative buzz relating to them (apart from my rant). They've also recently announced the expansion of their leadership team so they are obviously doing very well.
I have nothing against Securent and their place in the market. More power to them for attacking the niche of authorisation management and realising it's been the poor cousin to identity management for awhile. Shame on IBM, CA, Sun, Oracle, BMC et al for not realising the potential and doing something about it...from a marketing standpoint (actually CA sort of have, but they only made a half hearted attempt and have not gotten any mindshare).
And that's exactly my point. Securent are winning on marketing. Their decision to use "entitlement management" to differentiate themselves from the pack has been a masterstroke. The less informed amongst us seem to think just because it's not a term they've heard before, it must be new. It's not. Like I've been saying over and over again, it's just authorisation/access management re-badged. Anyone who believes otherwise has been "marketed".