Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
06/06/2026 11:17 am
TL;DR: Facial biometrics are positioned as the strongest passwordless method for verifying the real user rather than just a device, and Ping Identity says its Global Consumer Survey found biometric authentication ranked as the top feature that would increase trust in organisations. In high-assurance environments, that shifts the security question from eliminating passwords to proving identity across every digital interaction.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Ping Identity: facial biometrics, passwordless authentication, and identity assurance
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations choose between passkeys and facial biometrics?
A: Choose based on assurance, not convenience.
Q: Why do passwordless methods not all provide the same level of trust?
A: Because they solve different problems.
Q: How can security teams reduce privacy risk when using biometrics?
A: Use privacy-preserving biometric designs that minimise what is stored, retained, or exposed during verification.
Practitioner guidance
- Map passwordless methods to assurance tiers Classify SMS OTPs, passkeys, call centre verification, and facial biometrics by the level of identity confidence they actually provide.
- Restrict facial biometrics to high-assurance journeys Limit biometric use to transactions or access paths where impersonation, fraud, or account takeover would create material loss.
- Review biometric privacy architecture before scale-out Check whether the design stores raw biometric data centrally, uses reusable templates, or relies on privacy-preserving verification.
What's in the full article
Ping Identity's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- How the survey framing links biometric authentication to consumer trust in practical terms
- The specific passwordless methods discussed and how their assurance properties differ
- Which high-assurance industries the article uses as examples for stronger identity verification
- The privacy and zero-knowledge angle behind decentralized biometrics across devices and platforms
👉 Read Ping Identity's analysis of facial biometrics and passwordless trust →
Facial biometrics and passwordless access: what changes for IAM?
Explore further
06/06/2026 12:00 pm
Identity assurance, not password removal, is the real control objective. The article is right to separate passwordless from assured identity, because the operational problem is whether the authenticator binds a person to the account strongly enough for the transaction risk. OTPs and passkeys can reduce password exposure, but they do not automatically prove who is present at the point of use. Practitioners should treat assurance level as the governing criterion, not password elimination alone.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 79% of organisations have experienced secrets leaks, with 77% of these incidents resulting in tangible damage.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What should IAM teams do before rolling out biometrics more broadly?
A: Define where biometrics are justified by risk, then validate the enrolment process, fallback paths, and privacy controls before expansion. Broad rollout without assurance mapping often creates false confidence. The practical test is whether the method increases trust for the specific journey, not whether it is the newest option available.
👉 Read our full editorial: Facial biometrics raise identity assurance for passwordless access
