Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
12/06/2026 10:09 pm
TL;DR: Many “passwordless” programmes still leave passwords lurking in the background through partial deployment, legacy application fallback, or uneven implementation across the enterprise, according to Axiad. That makes the security and user-experience gains conditional, not complete, and turns passwordless into a governance problem as much as an authentication one.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Axiad: Is Your Passwordless Solution Truly Password-LESS?
Questions worth separating out
A: Start by mapping every login, recovery, and exception path, then remove passwords only where the full flow can be protected with a strong alternative such as PKI or FIDO2.
Q: Why do partial passwordless deployments still create identity risk?
A: Partial deployments create uneven assurance across applications, users, and devices, which means the weakest surviving path can continue to govern the overall security posture.
Q: How do security teams know whether passwordless is actually working?
A: They know it is working when passwords are no longer required anywhere in the intended access journey, including fallback and recovery.
Practitioner guidance
- Map password dependencies across the full access path Identify every application, recovery path, and exception flow that still depends on passwords, shared secrets, or hidden fallback logic.
- Separate strong authentication from convenience layers Document which controls provide primary assurance, which provide user experience, and which only reduce login friction.
- Prioritise legacy applications that block estate-wide adoption Target the systems that force passwords to remain in use for the broadest user populations, especially remote workforce access and business-critical applications.
What's in the full article
Axiad's full blog post covers the implementation detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Specific examples of how PKI, FIDO2, and enterprise SSO fit together in mixed environments
- Practical guidance on when passwordless is passwordless at the application level versus the user-experience level
- The article's five-step transition advice for getting from partial adoption to broader deployment
- The vendor's perspective on why interoperability still shapes enterprise rollout choices
👉 Read Axiad's analysis of whether passwordless authentication is truly passwordless →
Passwordless authentication: what is the governance gap teams miss?
Explore further
13/06/2026 12:43 am
Passwordless is a governance state, not a marketing label: The article shows that organisations can adopt passwordless methods while still leaving password dependencies in the environment. That means the real question is not whether a login screen is password-free, but whether the access path, application tier, and fallback logic have all been redesigned. Practitioners should treat passwordless as a lifecycle outcome, not a point feature.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 91.6% of secrets remain valid five days after the targeted organisation is notified, showing a critical gap in remediation procedures, according to Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
- 71% of NHIs are not rotated within recommended time frames, increasing the risk of compromise over time.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who is accountable when passwordless controls still leave legacy access paths in place?
A: IAM, application owners, and platform teams all share accountability because the control gap exists at the boundary between identity policy and application implementation. Frameworks such as the NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 are useful here because they force ownership across identify, protect, and govern activities.
👉 Read our full editorial: Passwordless is not passwordless if legacy auth still remains
