Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
25/06/2026 12:46 am
TL;DR: Identity-related alerts are consuming 11 person-hours each on average, while credential theft rose 160% in 2025, pushing privileged access management toward just-in-time controls, short-lived tokens, and tighter NHI governance according to Apono. The governing assumption is no longer that privileged access is stable enough to review later; in practice, access must expire before it becomes a standing attack surface.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Apono: Top 10 Privileged Access Management Software Solutions
By the numbers:
- Non-human identities outnumber human users by more than 80:1 in cloud environments.
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should security teams reduce standing privilege in cloud PAM programmes?
A: Start by finding every account that can reach production systems without a current task requirement.
Q: Why do non-human identities complicate privileged access governance?
A: Because service accounts, API keys, and automation identities often outnumber human users and are created faster than teams can review them.
Q: What breaks when privileged credentials are vaulted but not lifecycle-managed?
A: Vaulting without lifecycle management still leaves access available whenever a request can be made.
Practitioner guidance
- Replace standing privileges with task-scoped issuance Identify admin, service account, and automation paths that keep access open after the work is done.
- Inventory machine identities by owner and workload Build a complete register of service accounts, API keys, tokens, and certificates, then map each one to a current workload owner.
- Separate vaulting from authorization Use vaults to store secrets, but do not treat storage as governance.
What's in the full article
Apono's full article covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Side-by-side product feature summaries for the ten PAM platforms listed in the article.
- Implementation-oriented feature comparisons for JIT access, vaulting, session monitoring, and machine identity management.
- Pricing and review snippets for each platform, useful when you are narrowing a shortlist.
- The article's own buyer guidance on choosing a PAM solution for cloud and DevOps estates.
👉 Read Apono's overview of modern privileged access management software →
Privileged access management for NHIs and AI workloads: what changes?
Explore further
25/06/2026 9:45 am
Standing privilege is the failure mode modern PAM is being asked to contain. The article is really about the cost of leaving high-value access permanently available across users and NHIs. Once privileged access persists beyond the task, every stolen credential, bot token, or service account becomes a reusable entry point. That is why the control conversation has shifted from vaulting alone to reducing the lifetime and scope of access itself. Practitioners should treat standing privilege as the condition that makes identity compromise expensive.
A few things that frame the scale:
- Two-thirds of enterprises have endured a successful cyberattack resulting from compromised non-human identities, with a quarter encountering multiple attacks, according to The 2024 ESG Report: Managing Non-Human Identities.
- Enterprises that have experienced a compromised NHI averaged 2.7 separate incidents in the past 12 months, according to The 2024 ESG Report: Managing Non-Human Identities.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Who should own privileged access decisions for machine identities?
A: Ownership should sit with the team responsible for the workload, with security defining policy and PAM enforcing it. If no business owner can explain why the access exists, the identity should be reviewed for removal. That accountability model prevents automation credentials from becoming permanently exempt from governance.
👉 Read our full editorial: Privileged access management for NHIs is shifting to JIT controls
