Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
10/07/2026 9:19 pm
TL;DR: Hardware security keys remain one of the strongest defences against phishing and credential theft, but enterprises increasingly need lifecycle management, broader hardware choice, and platform integration rather than standalone tokens, according to Deepnet Security. The governance question is no longer whether keys work, but whether identity teams can manage them at scale without creating unmanaged device sprawl and weak recovery paths.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Deepnet Security: Best YubiKey Alternatives for Enterprise MFA
By the numbers:
- 91% of former employee tokens remain active after offboarding, leaving organisations vulnerable to potential security breaches.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams implement hardware security keys in enterprise MFA?
A: Start by defining enrollment, assignment, inventory, and recovery workflows before issuing a single key.
Q: Why do hardware keys create governance problems when lifecycle management is weak?
A: Because the organisation can authenticate users successfully while losing track of the devices themselves.
Q: What do security teams get wrong about phishing-resistant authentication?
A: They often assume phishing resistance alone solves identity risk.
Practitioner guidance
- Map every security key to a joiner-mover-leaver workflow Tie issuance, replacement, and retirement of each hardware key to the same identity events that govern user access.
- Require centralized token inventory and recovery handling Do not adopt standalone keys without a process for lost-device replacement, emergency recovery, and stale-token cleanup.
- Evaluate policy enforcement beyond login success Check whether the MFA platform can enforce PIN complexity, biometric requirements, and token assignment rules.
What's in the full article
Deepnet Security's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Side-by-side feature comparison of SafeKey and Titan across FIDO2, U2F, HOTP, TOTP, PIV, and biometric options
- Enterprise lifecycle management functions for token enrolment, assignment, inventory tracking, and lost-device handling
- Deployment considerations for pairing hardware keys with an MFA platform rather than using standalone devices
- Product-family form factors such as Classic, Fold, Mini, and Card for different user populations
👉 Read Deepnet Security's comparison of enterprise YubiKey alternatives →
YubiKey alternatives for enterprise MFA: are your controls ready?
Explore further
10/07/2026 9:41 pm
Hardware authentication is only half the control story. FIDO2 security keys reduce phishing exposure, but enterprises still fail if the authenticator cannot be bound to lifecycle governance, inventory, and revocation. The security value comes from pairing cryptographic login strength with identity operations that know who holds each key and when it should be retired. Organisations should treat the key as one part of an access governance chain, not the whole control.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 91% of former employee tokens remain active after offboarding, leaving organisations vulnerable to potential security breaches, according to The 2025 State of NHIs and Secrets in Cybersecurity.
- 44% of NHI tokens are exposed in the wild, being sent or stored over platforms like Teams, Jira tickets, Confluence pages, and code commits.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between a standalone security key and a managed MFA platform?
A: A standalone key authenticates the user, while a managed MFA platform can also enforce policy, track inventory, and support lifecycle events. For enterprise use, that difference matters because authentication success is not the same as governance control. The better question is whether the platform can manage the token after sign-in.
👉 Read our full editorial: Best YubiKey alternatives reshape enterprise MFA governance
