Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 10:13 pm
TL;DR: Passwordless authentication can reduce password friction and improve user experience, but it shifts control design toward cryptographic credentials, PKI, device issuance, and recovery paths, according to Axiad’s PeerSpot-based customer examples. The governance challenge is no longer just authentication strength, but how identity teams manage issuance, compliance, and operational trust across endpoints and users.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: Passwordless Made Easy
By the numbers:
- 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities such as service accounts and API keys.
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures.
- 97% of NHIs carry excessive privileges, increasing unauthorised access and broadening the attack surface.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams govern passwordless authentication in enterprise environments?
A: Security teams should govern passwordless as a full identity lifecycle, not just an authentication change.
Q: Why does passwordless authentication still require strong lifecycle management?
A: Because passwordless removes passwords, not identity risk.
Q: What do teams get wrong when they treat passwordless as a user experience project?
A: They focus on fewer prompts and lower help-desk calls while under-investing in proofing, revocation, and exception handling.
Practitioner guidance
- Inventory every passwordless authenticator type Classify whether the programme uses smart cards, hardware keys, PKI certificates, OTP tokens, or mobile-based issuance.
- Bind credential issuance to identity proofing Require documented validation before any passwordless credential is issued, especially for employees, contractors, and privileged users.
- Connect revocation to lifecycle events Make certificate and key revocation part of joiner-mover-leaver, offboarding, and device replacement workflows.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog covers the deployment detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Customer-reported examples of passwordless rollout across VPN, VDI, workstation logon, and cloud applications
- Practical details on smart-card issuance, YubiKey enrolment, and OTP token deployment paths
- Implementation comments on PKI design choices, endpoint configuration, and validation steps
- Operational observations on user adoption, service-desk volume, and the handling of credential management tasks
👉 Read Axiad's blog on passwordless authentication use cases and deployment experience →
Passwordless authentication: what IAM teams need to know?
Explore further
13/06/2026 12:50 am
Passwordless authentication is a control redesign, not a password removal project. The article frames passwordless as simpler and more secure, but the deeper shift is architectural: identity teams are replacing shared secrets with managed cryptographic trust. That changes the operational burden from password resets to issuance, attestation, revocation, and recovery. Practitioners should treat passwordless as a new control plane, not an incremental UX improvement.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities such as service accounts and API keys, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after notification is a reminder that identity remediation often lags well behind discovery, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable when a passwordless credential is issued incorrectly or not revoked?
A: Accountability should sit with the identity and access governance owner, not only the deployment team. Passwordless programmes require clear ownership for enrolment, certificate policy, recovery, and offboarding. If those controls are split across teams, failure will usually appear first in the exception path.
👉 Read our full editorial: Passwordless authentication changes identity risk and user friction
