Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
09/06/2026 11:25 pm
TL;DR: Ransomware response still depends on seeing identity-driven attack paths early, with Netwrix’s on-demand webinar centring on indicators of compromise, layered defence, and the use of Threat Manager and PingCastle to improve visibility and mitigation. The practical lesson is that identity telemetry, not just endpoint alerts, determines whether teams contain ransomware before business impact spreads.
NHIMG editorial — here’s why we think this discussion matters
By the numbers:
- 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities such as service accounts and API keys.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams detect ransomware before encryption starts?
A: Security teams should watch for identity anomalies that precede encryption, such as unusual administrative logins, privilege changes, remote tool use, and access to directory or backup systems.
Q: Why do service accounts and other NHIs matter in ransomware response?
A: Service accounts and other NHIs often provide the quiet pathways attackers need to move laterally, reach backup systems, or maintain access after the first foothold.
Practitioner guidance
- Map ransomware exposure through identity paths Inventory the accounts, service identities, and directory trusts that can reach critical systems, backup platforms, and administrative tooling.
- Prioritise alerting on privilege drift Tune detections for new admin rights, unusual group membership changes, and suspicious token or session reuse across the identity estate.
- Shorten the life of high-risk access Reduce how long privileged sessions, API tokens, and service account credentials remain usable after they are issued.
What to expect at the briefing
Netwrix's full webinar covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Detection examples from Netwrix Threat Manager that help teams identify suspicious activity earlier.
- Practical use of PingCastle for continuous Active Directory posture assessment and mitigation prioritisation.
- Response tactics that reduce real-world impact when ransomware activity is already in progress.
- Guidance on building a layered defence model without overwhelming the security team.
👉 Watch Netwrix's on-demand webinar on ransomware detection, response, and resilience →
Ransomware detection and response: is your identity data visible enough?
Explore further
10/06/2026 1:44 am
Identity visibility is the first control ransomware tests. Ransomware operators rarely need novel exploits when identity telemetry is weak. They look for dormant accounts, over-privileged access, and directory paths that allow quiet expansion before encryption starts. The operational lesson for IAM and SecOps is that visibility into accounts, tokens, and trust relationships is not supporting data, it is the control surface that determines whether response arrives early enough.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities such as service accounts and API keys, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who owns ransomware containment when IAM, PAM, and recovery teams are involved?
A: Accountability should sit with the incident commander, but execution depends on IAM, PAM, endpoint, and recovery teams working from the same playbook. The practical test is whether access can be revoked, sessions terminated, and backup paths protected without delay. Shared ownership is essential, but roles must be explicit before the incident begins.
👉 Read our full editorial: Ransomware detection and response still hinge on identity visibility
