Six myths about Oracle LMS-verified tooling, answered — what verification does and does not mean, what happens to your data, how false positives are handled, and why script output and platform data are complementary rather than rival.
The word “expert” is a slippery proposition. It denotes a wealth of experience, proven success and authority. Yet it is entirely possible to be an expert and still be doing things wrong — or to be doing things correctly, but in an antiquated way.
As technologists we need to keep learning. Experience and expertise are validated by engaging with new technology, not by outlasting it.
Yet in the SAM consultancy world, and particularly around Oracle licensing, there is a level of scepticism about SAM technology that goes past healthy and into the realms of neo-luddism: a refusal to learn the parameters of what a platform can and cannot do before dismissing it. And when ego makes the assumptions, errors are not far behind.
So the question is this. Is the expert the one who believes their past experience is sufficient to discredit a new technology without investigating it? Or the one who learns the new means at their disposal in order to think and work better?
Which would you take guidance from?
Neo-luddism in SAM is not dangerous, exactly. The consultancy-led approach will get you to an understanding of your licensing. The difference is that it is only ever point-in-time: an exercise that is not inexpensive, and whose value is exhausted almost immediately after it is delivered.
The technology-led approach is, at a high level, about not needing to repeat the manual process anywhere near as often. Which is what technologists do.
What a modern platform does with Oracle licensing would have seemed unlikely to somebody experienced in the dark art of optimising it. But the art is no longer dark. Customers want transparency and control over their data, their information and their own commercial position. It is not about buying a summary report. It is about continuous visibility and the ability to make good decisions from it.
We know how valuable licensing specialists are — Certero keeps an in-house SAM team precisely because both skills and technology are essential. But we could never be “tool agnostic”, because we know the difference between what the platform retrieves and what traditional discovery retrieves, and because we want customers to have the option of moving on from the old way of working.
So, without shouting “fake news” at the old approach, allow us to address some commonly held myths.
Certero is a verified third-party tool vendor with Oracle License Management Services. In practice, that means Oracle’s audit team can accept data from Certero during an official audit, as an alternative to installing Oracle’s own measurement tools. The more accurate information you hold, the better the foundation for analysing and optimising your position — and you get to see what was returned.
Myth: Being LMS verified means information from the solution is sent directly to Oracle.
Untrue. Using a verified tool means you have control over your own data. Nothing is sent to Oracle by Certero. Oracle has tested the technology and verified that its capability is sound. Treating that as equivalent to Oracle running scripts in an audit misses the point entirely — the platform exists to put you in control of what is collected and what you do with it.
Myth: Having a verified tool, and not using multiple inventory sources, means you cannot identify errors.
Untrue — mostly. Historically this would have been fair, and the Oracle work was built in the first place to be something you could compare other outputs against. That is why the need existed. You can still verify it against other sources, and in a services engagement we frequently do. The point is that you are comparing two things you can see the workings of, rather than accepting one.
Myth: Oracle only accepts the output of their own collection tool in an audit, and will not consider supplementary data.
Untrue. Certero data has been used in exactly this context. Even before the LMS verification, evidence from Certero was used to validate customers’ positions, because Oracle — like every publisher — is willing to consider evidence. What matters is that you have the data and the support to prove your position.
As a side note: only businesses that have been through the Oracle verification process appreciate the complexity and the level of testing involved on both sides. If it were easy, or a marketing gimmick with no real value, considerably more vendors would have done it.
Myth: Using a verified tool will not let you establish an accurate compliance position.
Untrue. The Oracle licensing logic was built by Oracle licensing experts, to be used in delivering SAM services — it is what Certero does day to day, and that knowledge feeds back into the product as Oracle’s own releases and policies move.
The only real dependency is completeness of inventory and entitlement, which is the same dependency anyone faces whether they approach licensing by declaration or by script. The difference is method: continuous rather than a one-off, point-in-time report.
Concretely, CerteroX SAM computes the effective licence position continuously — purchased, used, available, required, variance and exposure — rather than reconciling it when somebody asks. Software usage is metered over a rolling ninety-day window. Oracle-specific handling covers options and packs with the underlying evidence and a per-item override, processor types and core factors, licence pools with hosting rights and geographic rules, cover-down logic for Enterprise Edition, and uncapped quantity for unlimited agreements.
Myth: It only provides partial coverage — just database.
Untrue, and the claim usually rests on a misunderstanding of the verification programme. Oracle’s verification process covers Oracle Database and its associated usage. That is the scope of the verification, not the scope of the product. Beyond the database, CerteroX SAM also models E-Business Suite responsibilities, which is where a significant share of Oracle applications exposure actually sits.
Confusing the boundary of a verification scheme with the boundary of a product is a category error, and it is worth pushing back on whenever you hear it.
Myth: Oracle will require you to run LMS scripts in an audit anyway.
Untrue. The Oracle-created scripts are included and are untampered with, so it is unlikely Oracle would require you to run them separately again — it would simply duplicate the data. Think of it as LMS scripts plus the contrasting data sources, with the comparison itself being a function of the product.
Myth: Using the platform will allow false positives to be submitted to Oracle.
True — and for a reason. False positives can be dealt with directly, using the override and the Exclude From Licensing workflow, which records the decision, the reason and the evidence rather than leaving it in somebody’s spreadsheet. The false positives themselves are not generated by Certero; they are reported as part of the inventory and recognised accordingly.
False positives are a known hazard in any audit, and would appear regardless of the collection method. The whole point of having the platform is that you can see where they are and what they mean. Oracle requires you to submit all data unmodified, including any false positives — so what you want is to be ready to answer for each one, and to know exactly what you are running before the audit starts.
Myth: You cannot contrast script output with the platform’s data.
Untrue. Comparing Oracle script output with the platform’s data is perfectly possible, and the product is built to help that happen. We openly acknowledge that Oracle’s scripts return ad-hoc additional configuration data which our SAM team and our customers use to enhance the compliance position. We work alongside Oracle’s recognition rather than treating the two as rival, disconnected sources — and that is a value-add we pass on.
We hope this clears up some of the assumptions about what this technology does.
Certero provides technology-led SAM services, so we know the consultancy process well — and we built and use the Oracle capability ourselves because the visible, accessible data makes that process faster and, more importantly, repeatable. For customers, that means time to value is shorter, and the value can be sustained rather than expiring with the report.
As an independent partner, Certero works for you directly, and can provide anything from a tactical audit defence engagement to a full platform across five disciplines — CerteroX ITAM, CerteroX SAM, CerteroX SaaS Management, CerteroX Cloud Management and CerteroX AI Management — or a sustained SAM managed service. Dedicated licence engines cover Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, SAP, Adobe and Salesforce.
Our outputs are backed by evidence and supported by licensing experts working alongside the technology. So if any of this seems unbelievable, ask for a demonstration. We are always happy to prove it.
Other posts covering the same ground.
Locking an application down at user level does not make you compliant with a per-device licence. In a Citrix or RDS environment, one user with access can cost you a licence for every device in the organisation.
A third-party summary of a vendor can be wrong, and it stays wrong for as long as people read it. The case for checking a vendor's facts at source — and the current, sourced record for Certero.
An audit is won or lost on the quality of your inventory long before the letter arrives. Six ways data goes wrong, and what it takes to have the answer already in hand.
Everything argued above is checkable. Name the publisher, the billing account or the platform you would argue with, and the session is built around it — the reasoning attached, not a summary slide.
No gated download at the end of it.