Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
08/06/2026 4:05 pm
TL;DR: Passwordless authentication removes the password as a weak link, but it shifts risk to device trust, biometric capture, lost credentials, and weak IAM deployment practices, according to Axiad. The security gain is real only when authentication, lifecycle controls, and enforcement are complete across the full environment.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: Is Passwordless Authentication Safe?
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams implement passwordless authentication without creating new identity gaps?
A: Start by binding passwordless to a managed trust anchor such as a device, certificate, or hardened authenticator, then define revocation and recovery paths for every method.
Q: Why does passwordless authentication still leave organisations exposed to identity risk?
A: Because the password is only one trust mechanism.
Q: What breaks when passwordless is rolled out only to part of the environment?
A: A partial rollout creates two assurance models at once.
Practitioner guidance
- Map every passwordless trust anchor Inventory whether each flow relies on a device, biometric, certificate, or push approval, then test what happens when that anchor is lost, replaced, or stolen.
- Treat biometric enrolment as governed identity data Define retention, collection, and device-binding rules for biometric factors, and align them with privacy, legal, and IAM policy.
- Close partial-rollout gaps before expanding passwordless Require consistent enforcement across the full application set, including legacy apps, privileged access paths, and fallback authentication flows.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog covers the implementation detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Practical deployment guidance for moving from password-based access to device- or certificate-bound authentication
- A fuller discussion of biometric, device-loss, and recovery trade-offs that shape operational risk
- The vendor's recommended approach to PKI-based authentication and platform-agnostic rollout decisions
👉 Read Axiad's analysis of whether passwordless authentication is safe →
Passwordless authentication: are your identity controls keeping up?
Explore further
08/06/2026 5:30 pm
Passwordless authentication does not remove identity risk, it relocates it. The article correctly frames passwords as a weak link, but the deeper governance lesson is that authentication risk does not vanish when the secret disappears. It shifts to device trust, biometric handling, recovery processes, and lifecycle discipline. Practitioners should read passwordless as an identity architecture change, not a security end state.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts, which means many identity teams cannot reliably see where access is concentrated or stale.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What should organisations do if passwordless depends on certificates or PKI?
A: They should govern certificates like any other high-value credential. That means explicit issuance, renewal, revocation, and recovery controls, plus clear ownership for offboarding and exception handling. If certificate lifecycle is weak, passwordless simply shifts the problem from password hygiene to certificate sprawl.
👉 Read our full editorial: Passwordless authentication is safer, but identity risk shifts
