Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
08/06/2026 4:35 pm
TL;DR: Certificate-based authentication uses PKI, hardware tokens, and PIN verification to reduce password and OTP exposure across Windows, macOS, and major IAM platforms, according to Axiad. It matters because stronger authentication only works when certificate lifecycle, token security, and recovery processes are governed as identity controls, not as device logistics.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: The Why and What of Certificate-Based Authentication
By the numbers:
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures.
- Only 20% have formal processes for offboarding and revoking API keys, and even fewer have procedures for rotating them.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams deploy certificate-based authentication without creating lifecycle gaps?
A: Start by treating certificates as governed credentials, not just authentication factors.
Q: Why do certificate-based authentication programmes still need access review and offboarding?
A: Because cryptographic strength does not remove entitlement risk.
Q: What do organisations get wrong when they treat phishing-resistant MFA as a finish line?
A: They often stop at login hardening and ignore the operational controls that keep credentials safe over time.
Practitioner guidance
- Map certificate controls to identity lifecycle stages Track issuance, renewal, replacement, suspension, and revocation as explicit workflow steps inside IAM and access governance processes, not in endpoint support tickets.
- Bind token custody to user accountability Require hardware token assignment, PIN reset, and recovery actions to be recorded against the named identity so lost-device handling does not create blind trust gaps.
- Automate certificate revocation on offboarding Tie revocation triggers to joiner-mover-leaver events and deprovision certificates when a role change removes the need for access, especially for privileged users.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog post covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- A practical explanation of how certificate-based authentication is configured on Windows and macOS endpoints
- A walkthrough of token and smartcard enrolment flows for users and administrators
- The vendor's discussion of credential management system requirements for certificate lifecycle support
- Reference material on phishing-resistant MFA and the CISA guidance cited in the article
👉 Read Axiad's explanation of certificate-based authentication and PKI-based MFA →
Certificate-based authentication for IAM teams: where it fits and where it fails?
Explore further
08/06/2026 6:17 pm
Certificate-based authentication is an identity governance control, not just an authentication feature. The article is right to frame CBA as stronger than passwords and OTP, but the real control surface is broader: issuance, token custody, PIN policy, renewal, and revocation. That means IAM and lifecycle teams own the outcome together, not just the login team. Practitioners should govern certificates with the same rigor they apply to other high-value credentials.
A few things that frame the scale:
- Only 20% have formal processes for offboarding and revoking API keys, and even fewer have procedures for rotating them, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 79% of organisations have experienced secrets leaks, with 77% of these incidents resulting in tangible damage.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How do certificate-based credentials compare with password-based access for identity governance?
A: Passwords are easier to issue but harder to defend against phishing and reuse, while certificate-based access shifts the risk into lifecycle management and device protection. That makes certificates stronger for authentication, but only if the organisation can manage them as controlled identity assets from start to finish.
👉 Read our full editorial: Certificate-based authentication is the cleaner answer to phishing-resistant IAM
