Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 9:52 pm
TL;DR: Active Directory remains a primary target because it sits at the centre of authentication, authorisation, and network access, and Netwrix says this webinar focuses on finding gaps, hardening domain controllers, and improving investigation and alerting workflows. The governance lesson is that AD visibility and change control still determine whether identity incidents stay contained or spread.
NHIMG editorial — here’s why we think this discussion matters
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should teams reduce risk in Active Directory without flooding analysts with alerts?
A: Focus alerts on identity-changing events that alter privilege, delegation, trust, or controller state.
Q: Why does Active Directory posture affect more than human login security?
A: Because Active Directory underpins authentication and authorisation for users, services, and infrastructure.
Practitioner guidance
- Map tier-0 AD assets first Classify domain controllers, admin accounts, and directory management paths as tier-0 assets, then verify that each has explicit access ownership and review coverage.
- Track privileged directory changes end to end Ensure every change to users, groups, trusts, replication settings, and delegated admin rights is logged with an attributable identity and a reviewable event trail.
- Reduce alert noise around high-risk AD activity Tune detections for privilege escalation, sensitive group membership changes, and domain controller administration so analysts can focus on events that alter the identity posture.
What to expect at the briefing
Netwrix's full webinar covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Practical demonstrations of how Netwrix Auditor is used to identify and close Active Directory security gaps.
- Walkthroughs for fortifying domain controller security and reviewing high-risk directory changes.
- Investigation workflows that show who did what inside Active Directory and how to trace it faster.
- Alerting examples that increase the relevance of notifications on AD changes.
👉 Watch the Netwrix webinar on Active Directory security posture gaps →
Active Directory posture gaps: what IAM teams need to fix?
Explore further
13/06/2026 12:15 am
Active Directory posture is still identity governance, not just infrastructure monitoring. The directory defines who can authenticate, what can be authorised, and which systems inherit trust, so a posture gap in AD is a governance gap at the centre of enterprise access. That makes change visibility, escalation control, and evidence quality more important than raw alert volume. Practitioners should treat AD as a governed identity system with operational blast radius, not a background service.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 67% of organisations still rely heavily on static credentials despite the risks they pose to agentic AI deployments, according to The 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
- Only 13% of organisations feel extremely prepared for the reality of agentic AI, according to The 2026 Infrastructure Identity Survey.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How do security teams know whether AD investigations are actually working?
A: They should be able to answer who changed what, when, and through which administrative path without manually assembling logs from multiple sources. If that answer is slow or incomplete, the investigation process is not ready for real incidents. The goal is evidentiary clarity, not just log collection.
👉 Read our full editorial: Active Directory security posture gaps still shape identity risk
