What the CPM Safe names mean in CyberArk's Central Password Manager

Outline (brief skeleton)

• Hook: In CyberArk Central Password Manager (CPM), safes act like purpose-built vaults for different kinds of credentials.

• What CPM safes are and why their names matter

• The three names you’ll see: PasswordManager, PasswordManager_ADInternal, PasswordManager_info

• Quick explanations of each safe’s role and when to use them

• Why proper naming supports governance, access control, and auditing

• Practical examples and guidance on applying these safes

• Common questions, pitfalls, and pro tips

• Takeaway: clear naming helps security stay sane and scalable

Now, the article

Meet the CPM Safes: a simple map to safer passwords

If you’ve ever set up a password vault, you know the drill: you want a place that’s easy to use, but where access is tightly controlled. CyberArk’s Central Password Manager (CPM) uses safes as the logical containers for credentials. Think of them as well-labeled drawers in a high-security cabinet. The names you give those drawers aren’t just cosmetic; they guide who can reach in, what kind of data lives there, and how audits roll up into policy. In CyberArk, there are a few standard safes that teams rely on, and the trio we’re focusing on today is PasswordManager, PasswordManager_ADInternal, and PasswordManager_info. Each one has its own job, its own audience, and its own safeguards.

PasswordManager: the workhorse safe

Let’s start with the big one, PasswordManager. This is the primary module where core passwords live. When you think about service accounts, application credentials, or any password that’s central to an automation or a service, this is the safe you reach for first. It’s designed to handle regular rotation, strong access controls, and robust audit trails. The goal is straightforward: keep the important passwords organized in a central place so teams can run automated tasks or manual processes without juggling credentials in spreadsheets or on sticky notes.

In practice, PasswordManager is where you store the keys to essential parts of the environment. It supports disciplined password changes, credential aging policies, and clear ownership. If you’re mapping out a password lifecycle for critical systems, PasswordManager is typically the backbone. It’s efficient, it’s familiar, and it anchors governance across automation pipelines and manual workflows alike.

PasswordManager_ADInternal: a safe tailored for Active Directory credentials

Next up is PasswordManager_ADInternal. This safe is specialized for credentials tied to Active Directory (AD) environments. AD is a cornerstone for many organizations, and the credentials it uses—like AD service accounts, run-as accounts, or domain service credentials—often require distinct handling. PasswordManager_ADInternal exists to address those AD-centric needs.

Why separate AD-related credentials? Because AD has its own rotation rhythms, its own risk profile, and often a different audience of administrators and automation tools. Grouping AD credentials into a dedicated safe helps ensure that only the right people and workflows access them, without mixing in non-AD credentials. It also makes auditing cleaner: you can see “these AD passwords” being touched, rotated, or retrieved, without wading through unrelated secrets.

PasswordManager_info: a safe for the not-so-sensitive stuff (and a little more)

Then there’s PasswordManager_info. This one is typically used for credentials that are less sensitive or for information that still needs protection but doesn’t carry the same risk as production credentials. It might host vendor passwords, application keys that are rotated frequently but not tied to critical services, or other credential data that benefits from being stored in a safeguarded vault with logging and access controls.

This safe doesn’t imply you should stack up low-value data there and ignore security. Rather, it acknowledges a practical tiering approach: keep the highly sensitive stuff in PasswordManager, keep AD-related credentials in PasswordManager_ADInternal, and reserve PasswordManager_info for items that warrant protection but aren’t at the highest risk tier. That separation supports both security and operational efficiency. It avoids bottlenecks when teams need access to certain credentials quickly, while still preserving the guard rails.

Why the names matter: governance, access, and clarity

Names aren’t just labels; they’re governance signals. Clear, purpose-driven names help security teams set the right policies, grant access to the right people, and generate meaningful audit logs. When you see a list of safes, those names tell you immediately what kind of credentials belong there, who should access them, and how rotation should be handled.

• Governance: Distinct safes create boundaries. AD credentials in PasswordManager_ADInternal can be governed with policies that reflect their AD-specific risk profile.

• Access control: Different safes can have different access teams. A system admin group might have broad access to PasswordManager and more restricted access to PasswordManager_ADInternal, depending on your security model.

• Auditing: With separate safes, audit reports are cleaner and more actionable. You can trace exactly which credentials were accessed, by whom, and for what purpose.

Real-world scenarios: how these safes fit into day-to-day security

• Service accounts powering critical apps: You’d store these in PasswordManager. They’re high value, rotate often, and usually require automated workflows to retrieve them securely.

• AD-related automation tasks: If your automation tools need to tap AD service accounts or domain credentials, PasswordManager_ADInternal becomes the logical home. This keeps AD-related secrets isolated from general-purpose credentials.

• Non-production or lower-risk data: For vendor portals or testing credentials that still need protection, PasswordManager_info provides a safer container than leaving things wide open.

A simple rule of thumb: align the safe with its audience and its risk

• If the credential impacts core infrastructure or production apps, lean toward PasswordManager.

• If the credential is tied to AD and its lifecycle, use PasswordManager_ADInternal.

• If you’re storing less sensitive credentials or ancillary information, PasswordManager_info is a good fit.

Practical tips to make the most of these safes

• Define clear ownership: assign a single owner for each safe, plus secondary approvers for changes. This keeps accountability crystal.

• Establish rotation cadences: set rotation policies that reflect risk. High-value passwords deserve tighter rotation than informational credentials.

• Map safes to workflows: ensure automation tools know which safe to query for different kinds of credentials. Misplaced secrets create friction—and risk.

• Review access regularly: periodic audits help catch stale permissions, role changes, or orphaned access.

• Keep naming consistent across the organization: harmonized names reduce confusion, especially in multi-team environments or during audits.

• Document the policy in team wiki or runbooks: a short, readable guide helps new engineers follow the right path without guessing.

Common questions and quick clarifications

• Can I move credentials between safes if the use case changes? Yes, but plan it carefully. Migration should be logged, and you’ll want to verify that access controls still align with the new home.

• Should every credential live in PasswordManager? Not necessarily. Some AD-related items or less sensitive data might fit better in PasswordManager_ADInternal or PasswordManager_info, depending on risk and usage.

• What about audit reports? With separate safes, you can produce targeted reports—who accessed what, when, and from where. That makes compliance and governance smoother.

A touch of practical sensibility: keeping it human and manageable

Security is partly about systems, and partly about people. Names help teams work together without stepping on each other’s toes. When all safes have clear purposes, it’s easier to train new teammates, assign responsibilities, and answer questions fast. You don’t want a password-silo situation where someone reaches into the wrong drawer and creates chaos. The three safes—PasswordManager, PasswordManager_ADInternal, PasswordManager_info—mirror a sensible division of labor: core passwords, AD-centric credentials, and the not-so-critical stuff. It’s a lightweight but effective way to keep the vault orderly and the risk contained.

Wrapping up: a balanced, well-structured approach

Understanding the naming and purpose of these CPM safes isn’t about memorizing a list. It’s about thinking through how credentials flow through your environment and how access gets controlled. PasswordManager acts as the main repository for essential passwords. PasswordManager_ADInternal isolates AD-related credentials for specialized handling. PasswordManager_info covers the rest, ensuring you don’t overexpose anything while keeping operations smooth.

If you’re just starting to map out your CyberArk CPM strategy, these safes provide a clear framework. Start by documenting what lives in each safe, who should access it, and how rotation happens. Then test your workflows in a staged environment, verify that the access controls match the policy, and adjust as needed. Before you know it, your credential governance will feel straightforward—like a well-organized cabinet where every key has its rightful place.

Final thought: a small naming choice can yield big clarity

Names matter in security, not as a vanity metric, but as a practical tool for protection, efficiency, and accountability. By leveraging PasswordManager, PasswordManager_ADInternal, and PasswordManager_info thoughtfully, you build a foundation where credentials are easier to manage and harder to misuse. It’s a simple concept in practice—yet it pays off in real-world resilience. If you’re setting up or refining a CPM deployment, start with that trio and let the rest follow.