TL;DR: Passwordless authentication works best when it is unified across devices and applications, because fragmented login paths increase friction, encourage workarounds, and weaken zero-trust posture, according to Axiad. The governance issue is not whether passwords disappear, but whether identity controls remain coherent enough to support consistent access decisions.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: Why the Best Passwordless Authentication Solution Must Be a Unified One
By the numbers:
- 92% of organisations expose NHIs to third parties, raising concerns about supply chain security.
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface.
- Only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into their service accounts.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams implement passwordless authentication without creating policy sprawl?
A: Start by defining one authentication policy framework that applies across applications, devices, and user groups.
Q: Why do passwordless programmes fail when they are not unified?
A: They fail because users and administrators end up navigating multiple login experiences, each with different requirements and edge cases.
Q: How do you know if passwordless authentication is actually improving security?
A: Look for fewer fallback methods, fewer duplicated enrollments, lower help desk recovery volume, and consistent policy enforcement across applications.
Practitioner guidance
- Consolidate passwordless policy into a single control model Map all authentication methods to one policy baseline so device trust, biometric checks, and behavioural signals are governed consistently across applications.
- Use SSO as the enforcement layer Route passwordless access through one identity path so assurance, step-up rules, and session controls are centrally observable and easier to audit.
- Separate authentication strength from authorisation scope Review whether strong login methods are being mistaken for least privilege.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog post covers the implementation detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Examples of how device-based and behavioural passwordless methods differ in operational deployment
- The article's step-by-step reasoning for why SSO reduces credential management overhead
- How Axiad frames zero trust and least privilege as the philosophical foundation for passwordless adoption
- The vendor's own guidance on starting small with one application or device before expanding rollout
👉 Read Axiad's analysis of unified passwordless authentication and zero trust →
Passwordless authentication unification: is your IAM stack ready?
Explore further
Unified authentication is a governance requirement, not a user-experience preference. The article is right to treat fragmentation as the core failure mode, because multiple passwordless methods across apps create multiple policy surfaces. Once that happens, IAM teams lose consistency in assurance, troubleshooting, and auditability. The practical conclusion is that passwordless only improves control when the identity experience stays unified from end to end.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 92% of organisations expose NHIs to third parties, raising concerns about supply chain security, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What is the difference between passwordless authentication and zero trust?
A: Passwordless is about proving identity without a password, while zero trust is about limiting what that identity can do after it is proven. Stronger authentication does not automatically mean smaller access scope. Effective programmes use passwordless as one control inside a broader least-privilege and continuous verification model.
👉 Read our full editorial: Unified passwordless authentication is the real zero trust test