Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
24/06/2026 7:00 pm
TL;DR: Identity teams still struggle to detect, respond to, and recover from directory abuse quickly enough to contain blast radius, according to Netwrix’s on-demand webinar on Active Directory security, and that gap matters because directory control remains foundational across human identity, NHI governance, and privileged access programmes.
NHIMG editorial — here’s why we think this discussion matters
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams measure Active Directory security maturity?
A: They should measure whether the directory can detect, contain, and recover from identity abuse, not just whether it stays online.
Q: Why does Active Directory security affect NHI governance?
A: Because service accounts, application identities, and delegated access often depend on directory trust paths and privilege assignments.
Practitioner guidance
- Benchmark directory controls against identity outcomes Map detection, response, and recovery capabilities to specific identity events such as privileged group changes, delegation changes, and anomalous authentication.
- Validate privileged recovery paths Test whether your recovery process can restore a trusted identity state after compromise, including privileged groups, trust relationships, and service account dependencies.
- Reduce standing privilege in directory administration Review administrative accounts, delegated rights, and service relationships that persist beyond task needs.
What to expect at the briefing
Netwrix's full webinar covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Assessment walk-throughs that show how to benchmark directory security maturity against real identity control outcomes
- Practical examples of detection, response, and recovery coverage that are useful for IAM and security operations teams
- Discussion of the control areas that most often create blind spots in Active Directory governance
- Role-specific guidance for teams that own directory administration, privileged access, and identity recovery
👉 Watch Netwrix's on-demand webinar on Active Directory security maturity →
Active Directory security maturity: what identity teams are missing?
Explore further
25/06/2026 4:06 am
Active Directory maturity is a proxy for enterprise identity resilience. Directory services remain the control plane for authentication, authorization, and privilege assignment in many organisations. When maturity is low, the failure is not simply technical exposure but weak governance over how identity state is detected, changed, and recovered. Practitioners should treat directory maturity as a core identity programme metric, not an infrastructure side topic.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts, which leaves most machine identities partially governed at best.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can IAM and PAM teams use an AD maturity assessment?
A: They can use it to identify which team owns detection, privilege hygiene, recovery validation, and response for each directory control. The assessment should expose accountability gaps and show where operational handoffs are too vague to contain identity abuse quickly.
👉 Read our full editorial: Netwrix’s active directory security webinar points to identity blind spots
