Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 10:26 pm
TL;DR: Automating 2-factor authentication can speed enrolment, simplify administration, and improve employee adoption while preserving stronger account protection than passwords alone, according to Axiad. The deeper issue is that MFA success is often operational, not technical: if enrolment and support are clumsy, users route around controls.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: Why Is Automating 2-Factor Authentication Important?
By the numbers:
- 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities such as service accounts and API keys.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts.
- 71% of NHIs are not rotated within recommended time frames, increasing the risk of compromise over time.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations automate two-factor authentication without weakening access control?
A: Automate enrolment, replacement, and recovery with the same governance you apply to other identity assets.
Q: Why does automating MFA matter for IAM teams?
A: It matters because MFA often fails at scale when manual setup and support create friction.
Q: What breaks when two-factor authentication is too hard to use?
A: Users delay enrolment, rely on workarounds, or resist the control altogether, and administrators spend more time handling exceptions.
Practitioner guidance
- Automate MFA enrolment and recovery workflows Use centralised provisioning for second factors so registration, replacement, and recovery follow a repeatable process.
- Set MFA policy at SSO entry points Require the second factor where users authenticate once and then reach multiple applications.
- Track MFA friction as a security metric Measure enrolment completion, reset frequency, and help desk volume alongside compliance rates.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog post covers the practical authentication details this post intentionally leaves at a governance level:
- How automated 2-factor authentication can be issued and distributed to employees at scale
- Why convenience affects employee adoption of MFA across day-to-day access workflows
- Where automated 2FA fits in relation to single sign-on and passwordless authentication
- The administrative trade-offs involved in managing multiple authentication methods
👉 Read Axiad's analysis of why automating 2-factor authentication matters →
Automated 2-factor authentication: what IAM teams should weigh?
Explore further
13/06/2026 1:12 am
Automating MFA is a human identity adoption problem, not just an authentication feature. The article correctly frames convenience as the difference between a control that exists and a control that is used. In human IAM programmes, friction drives exception handling, and exception handling quietly becomes policy drift. The practitioner conclusion is that MFA rollout succeeds or fails on operational design, not on factor count alone.
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 Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts, which is why identity governance must start with discovery before control expansion.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own automated MFA governance in an organisation?
A: IAM and identity governance teams should own the policy, while operations teams handle the technical delivery of enrolment and recovery workflows. The important point is accountability: second factors are identity assets, so they need lifecycle control, audit trails, and clear revocation procedures just like other access mechanisms.
👉 Read our full editorial: Automating 2-factor authentication changes IAM administration
