SCIM complexity explained: tackle group fragmentation

SCIM is designed to simplify identity management, but variations in its implementation often lead to group fragmentation. WorkOS provides solutions to tackle these inconsistencies and safeguard your system. 

‍

In this piece, you'll learn about:

• Problems arising from SCIM group fragmentation
• The security and operational risks involved
• WorkOS's approach to a more cohesive system

Let’s start by introducing SCIM and explaining how the variations in implementations can lead to integration challenges.

What is SCIM and why does implementation complexity matter?

SCIM is an open standard protocol designed to simplify identity management. It offers methods for creating, reading, updating, and deleting user accounts across multiple systems, thereby facilitating seamless integration of identity data between different applications and directories. 

However, despite the standardization provided by the SCIM protocol, individual providers may interpret and implement the protocol in slightly varied ways or introduce ambiguous scenarios that the protocol does not adequately address. Some providers might also be using the SCIM 1.0 protocol instead of SCIM 2.0.

Such inconsistencies can result in:

• Data duplication: Conflicting data from different providers can cause errors, such as HTTP 409 conflicts.
• Need for tailored solutions: Developers may need custom logic to handle specific actions, such as having to remove users manually before deleting a group due to a lack of group delete SCIM requests.

Understanding group fragmentation across SCIM providers

The concept of "groups" is instrumental for various functions, ranging from role-based access control (RBAC) to user provisioning and deprovisioning, as well as auditing and reporting. Groups serve as logical assemblies of users that are bound together by shared permissions or organizational roles. Ideally, they simplify complex tasks, enabling organizations to maintain consistency and security in their identity management strategies easily. 

SCIM offers a standardized schema for defining these groups, akin to how it standardizes the representation of individual users. This level of standardization not only streamlines the management of groups but also, in theory, facilitates their synchronization across services and platforms.

However, this is not always the case. When you delete or suspend a user, the inconsistencies among SCIM providers become starkly evident. Some will keep a user as “active” (e.g., if they’re part of a “provisioned group”), others will delete the user, and most will send a SCIM request where the user’s state is no longer active. If this wasn’t challenging enough, in most cases, even after removal or suspension, a user’s memberships may remain mutable, though these changes are not consistently communicated. 

Here are just some of these group nuances among popular SCIM providers:

• Okta: Suspends users but doesn’t communicate subsequent changes in group memberships that occur while the user is inactive if the same group is used for assignment and push.
• Azure: Does not suspend a user if they remain part of any provisioned groups.
• OneLogin: Deletes users rather than suspending them. If they’re re-added, they will be treated as a new user.
• JumpCloud: Suspends a user only if they are removed from a group they were provisioned through, but won’t provide further details on the suspension.

From IT admin to your application, this creates a divergent set of information for your application to process.

Challenges in SCIM group management

Fragmented group structures

SCIM providers often handle group memberships inconsistently. Some suspend users without updating group memberships, while others delete users entirely, leading to data fragmentation. This inconsistency requires developers to build custom logic to handle each provider’s quirks, adding unnecessary complexity to integration.

Syncing between multiple systems

Because each SCIM provider may treat group updates differently, a user’s group membership status in one system might not accurately reflect in another. This can lead to issues where users either retain access they shouldn’t have or are incorrectly removed from important groups. These discrepancies can lead to:

• Security risks: The foremost concern is security. If users remain part of groups that they should no longer have access to, this can potentially expose sensitive data or systems to unauthorized personnel. If your application uses groups for role-based access control (RBAC), this will present a significant security challenge.
• Billing inaccuracies: For applications that bill based on group membership, inconsistencies could lead to unwarranted charges, complicating financial management and eroding trust with your enterprise customers.
• Complexity in management: The differing behaviors across providers add multiple layers of complexity to an already intricate system. Application developers need to understand, build for, maintain, and extend their identity management solutions to accommodate these inconsistencies, making the process far more convoluted than necessary.
• Compliance concerns: Varying statuses and group memberships can hinder adherence to legal regulations and internal policies, especially in sectors that are highly regulated, like healthcare or finance.

Acknowledging these significant risks and challenges, it's clear that resolving these inconsistencies isn't merely advantageous but rather indispensable. Ignoring them could trigger a cascade of problems that are complicated, costly, and potentially damaging to your business.

SCIM complexity: Integration challenges

These discrepancies in SCIM implementations create significant challenges for developers. Here's how:

1. Inconsistent group management: Different SCIM providers handle group memberships and user status updates (like suspensions or deletions) in unique ways, forcing developers to write custom logic for each provider. This not only adds complexity but also increases the risk of errors or data mismatches across systems. On top of that, building and maintaining this custom logic is time-consuming and can quickly become a costly drain on engineering resources.
2. Synchronization issues: Since each SCIM provider may treat group data differently, syncing user and group information across platforms becomes difficult. Developers need to build mechanisms that reconcile these differences to ensure data consistency across systems. If not properly handled, users might retain access to groups they should no longer belong to or lose access to important resources prematurely.
3. Security risks: Inconsistent handling of user status and group memberships can lead to security vulnerabilities. For example, if one SCIM provider suspends a user without updating group memberships, the user may retain access to sensitive information. Developers must design systems that mitigate these risks by ensuring all providers are in sync, which is a complex task.

Best practices for SCIM group management

Below are some SCIM best practices to follow when managing groups:

• Centralized group management: By maintaining a single source of truth for group memberships, organizations can avoid the discrepancies that arise from managing groups on multiple platforms. 
• Regular audits and updates: Regular audits help identify and resolve group inconsistencies before they escalate. Reviewing inactive users, redundant group memberships, and misconfigurations ensures that your group data remains accurate and compliant.
• Automating group synchronization: Automating group syncs across systems minimizes the risk of human error and ensures that changes in one system are reflected across all others.

Overcoming SCIM group management with WorkOS

Traditionally, WorkOS adopted a neutral stance on group fragmentation in SCIM, simply passing along the data as received from the provider without alteration. This approach placed the responsibility for managing these complexities squarely on our users, and we realized it was time for change. 

WorkOS recognized that this very challenge falls directly within the scope of problems Directory Sync aims to solve. As such, it shifted its strategy to focus on providing a more unified and secure solution: When a user is deleted or suspended, WorkOS automatically removes them from all associated group memberships.

‍If the user is later reactivated, it becomes the responsibility of the provider and the IT admin to ensure that the group memberships are updated and accurate. While this may introduce a slight overhead for IT admins, the payoff is a system that's significantly more secure and consistent. As a result, developers using WorkOS can now navigate these challenges more smoothly. They no longer need to juggle multiple flows and can instead manage group memberships more efficiently for all users.

Getting started with Directory Sync couldn’t be simpler. With SDKs available for major programming languages and a simplified API, integration with any SCIM-compliant provider is made efficient, allowing WorkOS to address SCIM complexities. 

WorkOS offers a flat fee of $125 per connection, maintaining consistent pricing regardless of user count.

Explore Directory Sync by WorkOS.