Skip to content
All articles
Engineering19 May 2026·3 min read

Building a mental model of identity providers from scratch

A design is a set of bets.

Paycux engineering

A design is a set of bets. Writing down which bets you are making — and what would have to be true for them to be wrong — costs an afternoon and saves a rewrite.

This piece walks through how we think about it at Paycux, what we have changed our minds about, and where the sharp edges are.

The employee

That brings us to the employee. Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

Idempotency is not a nice-to-have in any system with retries. Key on an identifier the caller supplies, store the outcome, and return the same answer to the same key rather than doing the work twice.

The IT admin

Consider the it admin. Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument. A p50 that looks fine while the p99 is unusable is a reporting failure, not a performance one.

Measure before you optimise, then measure the thing users feel rather than the thing that is easy to instrument. A p50 that looks fine while the p99 is unusable is a reporting failure, not a performance one.

  • Name the boundary before you cross it
  • Measure what users feel, not what is easy to instrument
  • Make every retried operation idempotent
  • Write down the assumption that would invalidate the design

The application developer

That brings us to the application developer. Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Make the boundary explicit.

Where this leaves me

Consider where this leaves me. Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Make the boundary explicit. When one part of the system can only talk to another through a named interface, you can change either side without a meeting; when it cannot, every change becomes a negotiation.

Where this leaves us

None of this is exotic. It is the ordinary discipline of deciding what you own, writing down what you assume, and making the failures loud enough to notice.

If you are working through the same problem and want to compare notes, the docs cover the mechanics and the console shows the behaviour on your own data.

Everything here, already built

Sign-in, enterprise SSO, directory provisioning, roles and an audit trail behind one API. Start with the quickstart and have a working sign-in this afternoon.

Start selling to enterprise customers

Create an account, point sign-in at Paycux, and get back to the part of the product that is actually yours.