Stitchflow
ThreatQ logo

ThreatQ SCIM guide

Connector Only

How to automate ThreatQ user provisioning, and what it actually costs

Native SCIM not available

Summary and recommendation

ThreatQ, the threat intelligence platform used by enterprise security teams, does not support SCIM provisioning on any plan. While ThreatQ offers SAML SSO integration with identity providers like Okta and Entra, this only handles authentication through just-in-time (JIT) provisioning—users are automatically created on first login but cannot be managed through your IdP afterward. With 78% of ThreatQ's user base being large enterprises handling sensitive threat intelligence data, this creates a significant gap in user lifecycle management for security-conscious IT teams.

This JIT-only approach means IT administrators lose control over user provisioning, deprovisioning, and attribute management after the initial login. When security analysts leave the organization or change roles, their ThreatQ access must be manually revoked—a critical compliance risk in security operations where former employees retain access to threat intelligence platforms. The inability to centrally manage user attributes and group memberships also complicates role-based access control for different security functions.

The strategic alternative

ThreatQ has no native SCIM. Automate offboarding, user access reviews, and license workflows across every app, including the ones without APIs. We maintain the integration layer underneath. You focus on judgment, not plumbing.

Quick SCIM facts

SCIM available?No
SCIM tier requiredN/A
SSO required first?No
SSO available?Yes
SSO protocolSAML 2.0
DocumentationNot available

Supported identity providers

IdPSSOSCIMNotes
OktaThreatQ supports SAML SSO. No Okta OIN app with SCIM provisioning.
Microsoft Entra IDThreatQ supports SP-initiated SAML SSO with Entra. JIT user provisioning enabled by default (users created on first login). No SCIM-based provisioning.
Google WorkspaceVia third-partyNo native support
OneLoginVia third-partyNo native support

The cost of not automating

Without SCIM (or an alternative like Stitchflow), your IT team manages ThreatQ accounts manually. Here's what that costs:

Source: Stitchflow research, normalized to 500 employees:
Orphaned accounts (ex-employees with access)5
Unused licenses12
IT hours spent on manual management/year85 hours
Unused license cost/year$3,500
IT labor cost/year$5,100
Cost of compliance misses/year$890
Total annual financial impact$9,490

The ThreatQ pricing problem

ThreatQ gates SCIM provisioning behind premium plans, forcing significant cost increases for basic user management.

Tier comparison

PlanPriceSSOSCIM
ProNot disclosed
BusinessNot disclosed
EnterpriseCustom quote

Pricing structure

PlanPricingSCIMSSO
ProNot disclosed
BusinessNot disclosed
EnterpriseCustom quote✓ SAML

Market reality: ThreatQ's enterprise pricing is completely opaque, with 78% of users being large enterprises who need formal procurement processes and budget planning.

What this means in practice

JIT provisioning limitations

Users are created automatically on first SAML login with default permissions
No way to pre-provision users or set role assignments before access
Departing users must be manually deactivated in ThreatQ's interface
Group memberships and role changes require manual intervention

Security implications for a threat intelligence platform

New security analysts get immediate access upon first login, regardless of readiness
No automated role assignment based on IdP group membership
Manual cleanup required when team members leave or change roles
Audit trails depend on manual processes rather than automated provisioning logs

Additional constraints

No public pricing
Enterprise deals require lengthy sales cycles with custom quotes
Manual user management
Despite being a security tool, user lifecycle is entirely manual
200+ integrations available
ThreatQ connects to hundreds of security tools but lacks basic SCIM
Enterprise-heavy user base
78% large enterprise customers expect automated provisioning capabilities

Summary of challenges

  • ThreatQ does not provide native SCIM at any price tier
  • Organizations must rely on third-party tools or manual provisioning
  • Our research shows teams manually provisioning this app spend significant hidden costs annually

What ThreatQ actually offers for identity

SAML SSO (All Plans)

ThreatQ provides SAML 2.0 single sign-on integration with major identity providers:

SettingDetails
ProtocolSAML 2.0 SP-initiated
Supported IdPsEntra ID, Okta, Google Workspace, OneLogin
User provisioningJIT (Just-in-Time) only
ConfigurationStandard SAML attribute mapping
Access controlRole-based permissions within ThreatQ

Critical limitation: ThreatQ only supports JIT provisioning, where users are automatically created during their first SAML login. No SCIM-based provisioning means no centralized user lifecycle management.

Okta Integration Status

FeatureSupported?
SAML SSO✓ Yes (custom app)
SCIM provisioning❌ No
Create users❌ No (JIT only)
Update users❌ No
Deactivate users❌ No
Group push❌ No

Entra ID Integration

ThreatQ has documented Entra ID integration via the Enterprise Applications gallery:

FeatureSupported?
SAML SSO✓ Yes
SCIM provisioning❌ No
Automatic provisioning❌ No (JIT only)
User deprovisioning❌ No

The reality: Despite ThreatQ's 200+ product integrations and enterprise focus (78% of users are large enterprises), the platform lacks any SCIM provisioning capabilities. IT teams must rely on JIT provisioning or manual user management, creating security gaps when employees leave or change roles.

What IT admins are saying

ThreatQ's lack of automated provisioning creates operational overhead for security teams managing threat intelligence platforms:

  • Manual user creation required even with SAML SSO configured
  • No centralized way to manage user lifecycle through identity providers
  • JIT provisioning creates users automatically but can't remove them when employees leave
  • Enterprise-only pricing makes automation features expensive for smaller security teams

ThreatQ supports SP-initiated SAML SSO with Entra. JIT user provisioning enabled by default (users created on first login). No SCIM-based provisioning.

Microsoft Entra documentation

Users created automatically on first SAML login

ThreatQ SSO implementation notes

The recurring theme

While ThreatQ can create users on first login through JIT provisioning, IT teams have no automated way to deprovision users or manage ongoing access changes. This creates security risks in threat intelligence platforms where access control is critical.

The decision

Your SituationRecommendation
Small security team (<20 users) with stable membershipManual user management is workable
Medium security operations (20-50 users)Use Stitchflow: JIT provisioning creates audit gaps
Large enterprise security program (50+ users)Use Stitchflow: automation essential for compliance
Multi-team threat intelligence sharingUse Stitchflow: coordinated provisioning across teams
Strict SOC/audit requirementsUse Stitchflow: manual processes don't scale for compliance

The bottom line

ThreatQ offers robust threat intelligence capabilities but relies on basic JIT provisioning through SAML SSO—users are created automatically on first login with no centralized control. For security teams that need proper user lifecycle management and audit trails, Stitchflow delivers the SCIM-level automation that ThreatQ's enterprise pricing doesn't include.

Make ThreatQ workflows AI-native

ThreatQ has no native SCIM. We build complete offboarding, user access reviews, and license workflows across every app, including the ones without APIs.

Covers apps without native SCIM, including the ones without APIs
Less than a week, start to finish (~2 hours of your time)
Built with your team; extend to anything else in the company
Book a Demo

Technical specifications

SCIM Version

Not specified

Supported Operations

Not specified

Supported Attributes

No SCIM provisioning - only JIT provisioning via SAML SSOUsers created automatically on first SAML loginEnterprise pricing not publicly disclosed78% of users are large enterprises200+ product integrations but no SCIM

Plan requirement

Not specified

Prerequisites

Not specified

Key limitations

  • No SCIM provisioning - only JIT provisioning via SAML SSO
  • Users created automatically on first SAML login
  • Enterprise pricing not publicly disclosed
  • 78% of users are large enterprises
  • 200+ product integrations but no SCIM

Documentation not available.

Configuration for Entra ID

Integration type

Microsoft Entra Gallery app

Where to enable

Entra admin center → Enterprise applications → ThreatQ → Single sign-on

ThreatQ supports SP-initiated SAML SSO with Entra. JIT user provisioning enabled by default (users created on first login). No SCIM-based provisioning.

Use Stitchflow for automated provisioning.

Unlock SCIM for
ThreatQ

ThreatQ has no native SCIM. We still automate end-to-end workflows across every app, including the ones without APIs.

See how it works
Admin Console
Directory
Applications
ThreatQ logo
ThreatQ
via Stitchflow

Last updated: 2026-01-20

* Pricing and features sourced from public documentation.

Keep exploring

Related apps

Abnormal Security logo

Abnormal Security

No SCIM

Security / Email Security

ProvisioningNot Supported
Manual Cost$9,490/yr

Abnormal Security, the AI-powered email security platform protecting against BEC and phishing attacks, does not offer SCIM provisioning on any plan. While the platform supports SAML 2.0 SSO integration with identity providers like Okta and Entra ID, this only handles authentication—not automated user lifecycle management. Security teams must manually provision and deprovision analyst access through Abnormal's portal, creating operational overhead and potential security gaps in a platform specifically designed to protect against email-based threats. This manual provisioning model creates significant challenges for security operations. When new SOC analysts join or existing team members change roles, IT admins must coordinate manual account creation and permission updates in Abnormal Security. For a platform that's critical to threat detection and incident response, delays in provisioning can leave security gaps, while delayed deprovisioning creates compliance risks. The irony is stark: a security platform designed to prevent account takeover and credential abuse lacks the automated provisioning controls that prevent exactly these risks.

View full guide
Airwallex logo

Airwallex

No SCIM
ProvisioningNot Supported
Manual Cost$9,490/yr

Airwallex, the global payments and treasury platform, offers no SCIM provisioning support on any plan, including their custom Accelerate enterprise tier. Despite being positioned for enterprise use with features like multi-entity management and advanced treasury controls, Airwallex lacks any official identity provider integrations—no SSO, no provisioning, and no presence in major IdP galleries like Okta's OIN or Microsoft Entra. This creates a significant operational burden for IT teams managing financial access across growing organizations, where manual user provisioning and deprovisioning in a payments platform presents both efficiency and security risks. The absence of identity management capabilities means IT administrators must manually create, update, and remove user accounts in Airwallex—a particularly concerning gap given that this platform handles sensitive financial operations, cross-border payments, and treasury management. Without automated deprovisioning, former employees could retain access to financial systems, creating compliance risks and potential security vulnerabilities that most finance and IT teams cannot afford to overlook.

View full guide
Alkami logo

Alkami

No SCIM
ProvisioningNot Supported
Manual Cost$9,490/yr

Alkami, the digital banking platform used by banks and credit unions, does not offer SCIM provisioning or public SSO integrations. As an enterprise-only platform with custom pricing, Alkami appears to handle user management through direct account administration rather than standardized identity protocols. This creates significant challenges for financial institutions that need to integrate Alkami with their existing identity infrastructure—particularly problematic given the compliance requirements and security standards that banks must maintain. The lack of automated provisioning means IT teams at financial institutions must manually create, update, and deprovision user accounts in Alkami. For a platform handling sensitive financial data and customer information, this manual approach introduces compliance risks and operational overhead. Banks typically require seamless integration between their core identity systems and all applications accessing customer data.

View full guide