Topic starter
15/01/2026 3:57 pm
TL;DR: Password management still matters because reusable credentials, legacy stores, and inconsistent policies create avoidable exposure across applications, according to Curity. Centralization helps, but only when credential lifecycle controls, account decoupling, and migration discipline are treated as governance requirements rather than technical convenience.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Curity: “A Perspective on Modern Credential Management”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when password management stays fragmented across applications?
A: Fragmented password management creates inconsistent policy enforcement, uneven hashing practices and scattered audit trails.
Q: Why do reused passwords still matter in modern IAM programmes?
A: Reused passwords turn one exposure into multiple opportunities for account takeover because the same credential may authenticate to unrelated systems.
Q: How do teams avoid breaking continuity when moving to a central credential store?
A: Teams avoid disruption by separating credential data from account data and moving applications in stages.
Practitioner guidance
- Centralize password policy enforcement Move password policy, storage and audit events into a single IAM control point so applications no longer apply inconsistent credential rules.
- Decouple account data from credential data Separate usernames, emails and roles from password material so migration and validation changes do not force account redesign.
- Support legacy hashing during transition Keep compatibility with existing hashing algorithms and password stores so applications can move to the central system in stages.
Bottom line: Passwords remain operationally relevant, so IAM teams still need governance over where they are stored and how they are enforced.
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
08/10/2026 5:09 pm
Centralized password management is still an IAM governance problem, not a legacy nuisance. The article is right to frame passwords as a living control issue because reuse, scattered stores and inconsistent policies all expand the attack surface. In practice, this means password governance still sits inside identity architecture, not just help desk operations. Practical conclusion: if passwords remain in scope, the programme must govern where they live and how they are enforced.
A few things that frame the scale:
- The 2025 Gartner Machine Identity Management in a Hybrid, Automated AI World Survey showed that 32% of organizations use mostly automated methods to manage credentials and only 1% use fully automated methods.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between centralising credentials and decoupling credentials from accounts?
A: Centralising credentials changes where password policy, storage, and auditing live. Decoupling changes the data model so account attributes such as usernames and roles are managed separately from the secret material itself. In practice, centralisation improves consistency, while decoupling improves migration flexibility and reduces the risk of hardwired application dependencies.
👉 Read our full editorial: Centralized password management still matters for IAM governance