Alter vs CyberArk for AI agents
CyberArk built privileged access management: vaulting admin credentials, isolating and recording privileged sessions, and delivering secrets to applications so nobody hard-codes them. Palo Alto Networks completed its acquisition of CyberArk in February 2026, and the platform is now sold as Idira. Its agent product, Idira Secure AI Agents, applies the same thinking to agents — discover them, give each an identity, grant access just in time, revoke it when the task ends.
That product governs the MCP servers an administrator registers with it, local or remote. Agents connect to them through an Identity Broker URL, and to databases through Secure Infrastructure Access under zero standing privileges. For everything else, the long-standing model is delivery: Secrets Manager or a Credential Provider hands the secret to the workload, and the workload makes the call.
Alter is narrower and sits somewhere else. It is in the path of the calls an agent makes to third-party APIs — Google, Salesforce, Stripe, GitHub — holding the OAuth grant or API key, checking policy against the endpoint and parameters of that request, pausing it for a named approver if the policy says so, and writing an audit row whether it ran or not.
Alter and CyberArk, capability by capability
Every mark that is not a plain yes carries the sentence that explains it and a link to CyberArk's own documentation.
| Capability | Alter | CyberArk |
|---|---|---|
| Credentials | ||
| Injects the credential into the outbound call | Partial For MCP servers registered with it, the Identity Broker forwards each agent request, so it is on the path. Outside that gateway the model is delivery: Credential Providers and Secrets Manager hand the secret to the application at runtime, and the application makes the call. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
| The agent never holds the third-party token | Partial Calls routed through the proxy, and every call from a proxy-only key, never expose the token. A key granted the token-retrieval scope can fetch it, so issue agents proxy-only keys. | Partial An agent behind the Identity Broker is configured with a client credential for the broker URL, and database access runs through Secure Infrastructure Access. A workload using Secrets Manager instead retrieves the secret on demand, and from then on it holds it. Source (opens in a new tab) |
| Providers supported out of the box | 137 | Your MCP servers Secure AI Agents governs MCP servers an administrator registers, plus databases exposed through Secure Infrastructure Access's run_query and list_databases tools. The pages read list no catalogue of pre-built third-party SaaS API integrations, so there is no count to put here. Source (opens in a new tab) |
| Policy | ||
| Policy evaluated per outbound call, down to the parameter | Partial The Identity Broker authenticates and authorizes each request and grants access only for the duration of a task. The pages read describe that decision at the level of agent, server and task, not a rule on the arguments of an individual call. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
| Default deny: an unlisted endpoint is refused | Partial Zero standing privileges means an agent holds no access until a policy grants it for a task — a genuine default-deny posture at the level of the resource. The pages read do not describe refusing a specific endpoint within a resource the grant covers. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
| Control | ||
| A named human approves a specific pending call before it runs | Not described A person completes OAuth consent when an agent is first connected to an MCP server. The pages read describe no step at which someone approves one specific pending tool call before it executes. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
| Each agent is a distinct principal with its own keys | ||
| Revoking one agent cuts its access without rotating others | ||
| Evidence | ||
| An audit row for every credential-touching request | Partial For traffic through the gateway, the audit records the initiating human, the agent identity, the tools that ran and the resource touched. A secret delivered to a workload is used out of the gateway's sight, so those calls are not in that trail. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
| End users can see and revoke what an agent may do for them | — The registry, access reviews and audit trail are built for the security team. The pages read describe no view where the person an agent acts for can see or withdraw what it may do on their behalf. Source (opens in a new tab) | |
Comparison accurate as of September 23, 2026, based onCyberArk's public documentation. Products change: if something here is out of date, tell us athello@alterauth.com and we will correct it.
- Palo Alto Networks: Idira Agentic Identity Security (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Palo Alto Networks: Idira Agentic Identity Security (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Idira Docs: Connect MCP servers to AI agents (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Idira Docs: Secure AI agents' access to your organizational databases (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Palo Alto Networks: Idira Secrets Management (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Palo Alto Networks: Idira Application Credentials Delivery (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Palo Alto Networks: Idira Privileged Access Management (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
- Palo Alto Networks: Completes Acquisition of CyberArk to Secure the AI Era (opens in a new tab) — read September 23, 2026
CyberArk is a trademark of CyberArk Software Ltd., a Palo Alto Networks company. Alter is not affiliated with or endorsed by CyberArk Software Ltd., a Palo Alto Networks company.
Registered MCP servers versus direct API calls
Idira's Identity Broker fronts the MCP servers an administrator registers, local or remote, and databases reached through Secure Infrastructure Access, with agents granted just-in-time access and the grant revoked when the task ends. Alter sits on the agent's direct HTTP calls to third-party APIs, made on a user's or an organization's behalf with the grant Alter holds. That changes what a policy can be written against. A broker in front of an MCP server knows the agent, the server and the task; Alter, holding the OAuth grant and making the HTTP call, knows <strong>this endpoint with these parameters</strong> on <strong>this user's</strong> connected account.
- Idira: access to a resource, granted for a task, revoked when it finishes.
- Alter: each outbound call allowed, denied, or held for approval on its own merits.
- Idira: identities and targets managed by the security team.
- Alter: end users see and revoke the grants an agent holds for them in the wallet.
Delivered secrets and brokered calls
CyberArk's machine-identity products solved hard-coded passwords by delivering secrets at runtime — Credential Providers over HTTPS, Secrets Manager to workloads with a short-lived identity — and audit every retrieval. Once delivered, the application uses the secret however it likes. Alter's proxy path never hands the token over: the agent names the grant, Alter injects the credential on the way out. Alter also has a token-retrieval endpoint, and a key granted that scope does receive the raw token, which is why a proxy-only key is the one to give an agent you do not fully trust.
When CyberArk is the better choice
A comparison that never reaches this section is a brochure.
Privileged sessions, isolated and recorded
CyberArk brokers, isolates and records privileged sessions across infrastructure and SaaS, and can terminate a risky one mid-flight. Alter has no session layer at all: if the question is what an admin or a contractor did on a production server, that is CyberArk's ground.
Runs where you need it
Secrets Manager deploys as SaaS or self-hosted, including air-gapped data centres, and Credential Providers reach COTS software and mainframes. Alter can run on-premises as well as in its managed cloud, but it has nothing for mainframe or packaged-software credentials.
Analyst standing and breadth
Recognised in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Privileged Access Management and the Forrester Wave for privileged identity, with one platform spanning workforce, machine and agent identities. For a security team consolidating vendors, that breadth is a real argument.
Questions people ask
Is Alter a replacement for CyberArk?
No. CyberArk secures privileged human sessions, vaults infrastructure credentials and delivers secrets to workloads, and Alter does none of that. Alter governs the calls agents make to third-party SaaS APIs. Teams running CyberArk for their estate can put Alter in front of the agent's outbound API traffic.
Can I self-host Alter?
Yes. Alter is offered as a managed cloud service and can also be deployed on-premises; talk to us to scope an on-premises install.
Does Alter record agent sessions?
No. Alter records each credential-touching request as an audit row — who asked, which agent, which grant, what endpoint, the outcome — rather than a session recording. For isolating and replaying interactive privileged sessions, CyberArk's session management is the tool.
CyberArk is now called Idira. Does this comparison still apply?
Yes. Palo Alto Networks completed its CyberArk acquisition in February 2026 and markets the platform as Idira; existing CyberArk products continue under the new name. The claims on this page quote the current Idira pages.
Other comparisons
Put your agents under privileged access control.
Book a 30-minute walkthrough with the founders.