CA made a bunch of announcements last week regarding their line of security related products. The first about a new release of CA Identity Manager, another regarding CA Access Control, a third referring to CA GRC Manager and the last in relation to a brand new product called CA Security Compliance Manager.
I found the Identity Manager and Access Control announcements boring because they are just upgrades to existing products which almost all their competitors have. Upgrade announcements are boring because they are about new features which no one will really understand until they see them in action...and even then the competitors will all say "oh yeah we can do that too" even if they can't and just get the sales engineer to hack something together for the demo or POC that looks like it's out of the box.
I found the other 2 announcements much more interesting from a strategic standpoint...
The first thing I noticed was that they are sticking to the industry norm of using a completely boring name for new products while at the same time managing to use the same name as another vendor (e.g. all the major software vendors have a product called Identity Manager which does all the provisioning, de-provisioning, password management and account workflow related activities). In this case however, they have managed to use the same name as a product IBM has (Tivoli Security Compliance Manager) but for a completely different purpose.
The second thing I noticed was that they suddenly have 2 GRC centric products. If you are a regular reader, you'll know that I'm now doing some work in the GRC area after my year long sojourn into DLP so anything GRC related gets my attention.
Like many industry terms floating around (especially newer ones), GRC means different things to different people. It also means there are many software vendors out there claiming to solve all your GRC problems. What people don't necessarily always understand is that there are many different approaches (and drivers) for a GRC program within an organisation. Most commonly, a GRC initiative is viewed from one of the following angles:
- Risk Management
- IT Security
- Business Controls/Operations
As a result, there a lot of GRC software vendors that don't necessarily compete with each other even though at first glance you might think they do (usually because they stick the term GRC in their description). In fact, it makes sense for a lot of vendors out there to partner with each other to provide a more complete solution for organisations because none (including the large vendors) actually cover off the entire GRC solution. Whether an organisation needs the complete solution is an issue for another day.
Here's why the CA annoucement is interesting. CA GRC Manager looks to be enterprise risk management focused. They've now added CA Security Compliance Manager which looks to be IT Security focused. It's starting to look like organisations have decided that IT Security Governance needs to be centred around identities, which is why IT Security GRC is sometimes referred to as Identity Centric GRC. In my opinion, this means CA Security Compliance Manager competes directly with the likes of Sailpoint and Aveksa. Notice that I haven't mentioned any of the large vendors (e.g. IBM, Oracle, Sun, Novell, SAP) in this space. This is because they don't have anything that competes. Here's why:
- IBM don't have a GRC product. They use a combination of IBM Tivoli Identity Manager (ITIM) and IBM Tivoli Compliance Insight Manager to do GRC-like tasks. IBM, I'm afraid nice looking reports and some ugly ITIM screens that do some level of attestation but business users can't figure out how to use doesn't cut it.
- Oracle have a product, but it hooks into all their Finance, ERP and CRM applications. This means it's very focused on business controls.
- Sun thinks Role Management = GRC. I have news for you Sun. Even in combination with some of the things Sun Identity Manager does, you're still not there.
- SAP have solutions, but they all hook into...well, SAP! Just like Oracle, it's focused on business controls.
- Novell are even worse off than the others because they are still peddling their provisioning and access control solutions as being able to solve all your governance and compliance problems.
Thinking out loud, it might make sense for CA to partner with SAP on a joint GRC marketing campaign. I seriously doubt Oracle (or CA) will agree to such a concept. Or maybe SAP should just buy CA and be done with it.
Excellent post Ian! I'm in Toronto at Eurekify training this week, and we were talking about how CA agreed to resell Eurekify's ERM product, presumably to enhance CA Identity Manager deployments. Simply from a "check off the boxes" of product offerings (depth/breadth) in IdM/GRC/ERM from one vendor, CA has really stepped up to the plate to challenge Oracle. It will be interesting to see how potential customers view the CA portfolio.
Funny you should mention Eurekify. I agree that CA reselling the Eurekify Enterprise Role Manager (ERM) product makes sense. As you've said, it "checks the boxes".
One interesting dynamic that will result from the release of CA Security Compliance Manager is that Eurekify have GRC solutions other than ERM. These possibly overlap with the 2 CA GRC products somewhat. I can't say for sure because I haven't done a feature/function comparison.
I may have more about Eurekify soon but I'd be interested to hear what you think of the ERM product once you're done with the training.
Post a Comment