Saner Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management
Every entitlement, mapped and justified
Saner CIEM maps effective access across AWS, Azure, and GCP, reveals how identities, roles, groups, service accounts, and policies combine to grant permissions, proves excessive access with evidence, and guides remediation back to least privilege.
Powered by SecPod & USI
Saner Cloud Vulnerability Management is built on SecPod’s Prevent Framework, with a focus on cloud workloads and cloud-native exposure. Findings arrive with the context teams need to act, including account, region, service, and affected resources, so risk is clear and reviewable. Prioritization and remediation stay connected, so the fix order is defensible, and closure is trackable without breaking the chain.
Your first 30 days with Saner
From deployment to measurable risk reduction — here is what to expect.
Access risk becomes visible
See excessive permissions, inactive identities, risky roles, and critical activities across AWS, Azure, and GCP.
Investigations get clearer
Trace how access was granted, review the evidence, and understand which identities or policies need attention first.
Least-privilege remediation takes hold
Move validated findings into guided remediation and reduce entitlement risk with more control and traceability.
Key Features
Everything you need to stay ahead of threats.
Identity graph and effective access
Understand how identities, roles, groups, and policies combine into effective access.
Saner CIEM goes beyond flat IAM listings and shows how access is assembled across identities, roles, groups, policies, and permissions. In AWS, it maps how users, groups, roles, and policies connect. In Azure, it exposes relationships across users, groups, applications, managed identities, Entra roles, and RBAC roles. In GCP, it surfaces how users, groups, service accounts, policies, and roles interact across the resource hierarchy.
Evidence-backed permission analysis
Validate excessive permissions with traceable evidence, not assumption or guesswork
Saner CIEM does not stop at telling teams a policy is risky. It shows why. In AWS, Evidence for Excessive Permission points directly to the policy structure, including the reference path and the specific response value that makes access excessive. In Azure and GCP, evidence indicators are available inside role, application, policy, and critical activity views, so investigations stay grounded in actual permission logic instead of assumption. This is what turns least-privilege cleanup into a defensible engineering decision.
Role and policy risk classification
Separate broad, dangerous, dormant, and high-impact entitlements with clearer risk context.
Not every entitlement carries the same risk, and Saner CIEM reflects that. Azure distinguishes Entra and RBAC roles, surfaces elevated actions, administrative privileges, privileged access roles, and wide access policies, and lets teams inspect built-in versus custom role distribution. GCP classifies risky roles into categories such as legacy primitive, administrative, dangerous, impersonation, high-risk, cross-project, cross-organization, wildcard, and invalid or deprecated permissions. That kind of classification helps teams reduce access based on real blast radius rather than generic cleanup rules.
Scope-aware assignment analysis
See whether risky access is local, inherited, or spread across cloud scope.
Saner CIEM adds scope to entitlement analysis so teams can understand whether risky access sits at a narrow boundary or across a much larger control plane. Azure role assignments can be analyzed across tenant, subscription, resource group, and resource scope, while GCP critical activity is broken out by organization, folder, and project. That context matters because the same privilege looks very different when it is inherited broadly versus granted to one isolated resource set.
Dormant identity and orphaned access cleanup
Find inactive users, stale roles, empty groups, and orphaned bindings before abuse.
A large part of entitlement risk comes from access that no one should still have. Saner CIEM highlights inactive users, unused roles, dormant assignments, empty groups, inactive service accounts, unused or excessive policies, and orphaned bindings. Azure calls out inactive users, empty or dormant groups, and inactive assignments. GCP adds empty groups, inactive users, inactive service accounts, and orphaned policy bindings. This gives teams a practical route to shrink identity attack surface before abuse ever begins
Privileged identity optimization
Focus first on the users, roles, and assignments with the highest blast radius.
Saner CIEM helps security teams concentrate on the most privileged identities first instead of treating every entitlement equally. Azure surfaces the most privileged users and top privileged role assignments to show where high-impact exposure is concentrated. GCP does the same with Top 10 Most Privileged Users, breaking out excessive permissions, roles, and groups so teams can optimize high-risk identities with clearer justification. This is especially useful when identity sprawl makes broad review impractical.
Critical activity investigation
Connect high-risk identity actions to the actor, resource, evidence, and impact.
CIEM should not stop at static permission review. Saner CIEM captures high-risk activities and layers in the evidence needed to validate them. AWS critical activity evidence includes event details, request details, user identity, affected resources, and supporting context. Azure adds sign-in and activity alerts with initiators, location, impacted resources, and event outcomes. GCP monitors risky events by scope and shows the event name, category, actor, resource, service, IP, timestamps, and evidence. That makes entitlement investigation useful during active response, not only during periodic review.
Guided remediation and review at scale
Move from entitlement findings to guided least-privilege remediation without losing context.
Saner CIEM keeps remediation connected to the original finding. Recommended remediation views highlight identity and resource risks by severity, let teams inspect affected identities, and route directly into CSRM for guided correction. In GCP, admins can review impact, select identities for bulk removal or modification, and proceed into CSRM to deactivate inactive identities or reduce permissions. AWS guidance follows the same pattern by initiating remediation directly from CIEM. Filtering by type, usage, status, and permission category also helps teams work through large entitlement datasets without losing precision.