Topic starter
10/06/2026 12:11 am
TL;DR: Modern authentication programs need policy control, lifecycle integration, and access visibility to avoid leaving gaps in onboarding, offboarding, and privileged access, according to Zluri’s roundup. MFA still reduces password-only risk, but password protection is necessary, and identity governance is what keeps MFA from becoming a narrow front-door control.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Zluri: “Top 11 Multi-Factor Authentication Software In 2026”.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams use MFA without treating it as the whole identity strategy?
A: Use MFA as a verification layer, not as a substitute for lifecycle governance.
Q: Why do MFA deployments still leave security gaps in practice?
A: Because the control addresses authentication, not entitlement quality.
Q: Why is MFA not enough for modern identity governance?
A: MFA improves login assurance, but it does not stop session hijacking, replay, or misuse after authentication.
Practitioner guidance
- Align MFA policy with identity lifecycle events Tie authentication requirements to joiner, mover, and leaver processes so access changes when employment status, role, or risk changes.
- Use risk-based rules for privileged access Apply stricter MFA requirements to admin, sensitive, and high-impact applications rather than using the same challenge for every user and every app.
- Review where MFA stops and governance begins Map the points where authentication ends, then check whether access reviews, provisioning, and revocation take over.
Bottom line: MFA reduces password-only exposure, but it does not solve entitlement sprawl, offboarding, or privilege governance on its own.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
10/06/2026 9:28 pm
MFA is a control for access entry, not an access governance strategy: The article correctly shows that multiple factors can reduce password-only exposure, but that does not address entitlement scope, offboarding, or privileged access review. Organisations routinely overstate authentication controls when the failure mode is actually governance drift. The practical conclusion is that MFA should be judged by how well it plugs into lifecycle and policy enforcement, not by how many login methods it supports.
A few things that frame the scale:
- Nearly 60% of IT leaders cite restrictive cost and complexity as a weakness of legacy identity governance, according to the 2025 State of Identity Governance Report.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should teams prioritise MFA rollout or lifecycle management first?
A: They should do both, but incomplete lifecycle management can erase the value of MFA over time. If orphaned accounts, stale keys, and undocumented exceptions remain in place, strong authentication only protects a subset of the real risk. The best sequence is to secure the highest-risk access paths first while building the ownership and review process that keeps them governed.
👉 Read our full editorial: MFA software in 2026: why identity governance still matters
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group