Topic starter
08/06/2026 4:04 pm
TL;DR: Hybrid working has expanded the identity perimeter, and Axiad argues that security teams need to manage users, machines, emails, documents, and verification flows together because 90% of IT leaders reported more cyberattacks after the pandemic. The core issue is that identity assurance fails when governance is fragmented across too many credential types and access paths.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Axiad: “Identity crisis? It’s time to take the holistic approach.”.
By the numbers:
- 90% of IT leaders reported an increase in cyberattacks since the pandemic.
Key questions
Q: What should security teams do when IAM governance spans human and machine identities?
A: They should apply the same lifecycle discipline to both populations while preserving identity-specific review logic.
Q: Why do non-human identities increase identity security risk in hybrid environments?
A: Non-human identities often persist longer than the workflows that created them, and their access is frequently less visible than human access.
Q: What breaks when machine identities are not governed like first-class identities?
A: Access becomes persistent, hard to attribute, and easy to overextend across systems.
Practitioner guidance
- Map all identity classes Inventory users, machines, applications, devices, and external identities under one governance model so each class has an explicit trust path, issuance owner, and access boundary.
- Treat machine identity as lifecycle-managed Bind device and workload trust to certificate issuance, inventory, renewal, and revocation so machine identities are tracked from joiner to leaver events.
- Tighten identity proofing before issuance Require stronger enrolment checks for employees, partners, and customers before credentials are created, and align that proofing step with downstream access policy.
Bottom line: Hybrid work widens the identity perimeter by forcing organisations to govern people, machines, and verification flows together.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
08/06/2026 5:30 pm
Hybrid work exposes an identity governance gap, not just an access problem. When users, machines, documents, and verification flows are controlled separately, each team optimises its own layer while the attacker needs only one weak handoff. The result is inconsistent trust across the lifecycle, from enrolment to authentication to ongoing use. Practitioners should treat the identity perimeter as a governed system, not a collection of disconnected checks.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How should organisations reduce identity theft risk in digital onboarding?
A: Use higher assurance checks for anything that can change account control, move money, or expose sensitive records. Pair source-based verification with multi-factor authentication, and do not allow a single static identifier to confirm identity on its own. Strong onboarding is about reducing the chance that leaked data can be reused as proof.
👉 Read our full editorial: Identity crisis in the hybrid workforce needs holistic identity controls
This post was modified 4 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group