A Scoring Layer Needs Something Accurate to Score
Identity Security Posture Management (ISPM) tools evaluate identity hygiene and risk, flagging accounts without MFA, stale privileged access, misconfigurations, and compliance gaps, then prioritize what to fix first. That evaluation logic is genuinely useful, and it depends entirely on one upstream input: an inventory of the identities being evaluated.
That's the quiet problem with posture scoring. An ISPM tool scores whatever identities it or its connected sources already know about. If 30% of the estate (local accounts, orphaned service accounts, unmanaged AI agent credentials) never entered that inventory, the posture score is computed against the other 70% and presented as if it describes the whole estate.
An IVIP is the layer underneath ISPM that makes the inventory it scores actually complete. Continuous discovery, normalization, and correlation aren't a competing form of risk scoring. They're the input risk scoring has always depended on and rarely gets to audit.