Topic starter
28/08/2026 12:04 pm
TL;DR: Third-party credentials, SaaS tokens, and vendor accounts are often provisioned once and rarely re-evaluated, which lets attackers inherit broad reach and move quickly across environments, according to Zero Networks. Point-in-time onboarding controls are not enough when third-party access outlives the relationship that created it; continuous reachability governance is the real containment problem.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Zero Networks: “Third-Party Access Governance: How to Prevent Supply Chain Attacks”.
By the numbers:
- 78% say third-party and supply chain vulnerabilities are their #1 barrier to becoming cyber resilient.
- It takes almost eight months to resolve just 50% of weak passwords and permission misconfigurations for third parties.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when third-party access is not reviewed continuously?
A: The break is that access stays active long after the business relationship, vendor task, or application purpose has changed.
Q: Why do third-party credentials increase supply chain risk?
A: Third-party credentials increase supply chain risk because they often combine standing privilege with broad operational reach.
Q: How should organisations govern third-party access in regulated environments?
A: They should review third-party access as a separate governance stream with its own owners, expiry rules, and evidence trail.
Practitioner guidance
- Map third-party reachability continuously Build an always-current inventory of vendor accounts, OAuth tokens, API keys, and integrations, then record what each can actually reach inside the environment.
- Segment external identities by business need Restrict third-party identities to the smallest reachable resource set that supports the approved use case, with no implicit access to adjacent systems.
- Tie revocation to ownership drift Remove access when the business owner, vendor relationship, or integration purpose changes, rather than waiting for periodic review cycles.
Bottom line: Third-party access becomes dangerous when external identities keep their reach long after the business need has changed.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
28/08/2026 12:04 pm
Third-party access has become an identity governance problem, not just a vendor management problem. The article correctly shows that once a vendor, contractor, or integration is inside the environment, the real risk is what that identity can still reach after business need changes. That shifts the control objective from onboarding assurance to ongoing reachability governance. Practitioners should treat third-party access as a lifecycle asset, not a one-time approval.
A few things that frame the scale:
- 92% of organisations expose NHIs to third parties, raising concerns about supply chain security, according to the Ultimate Guide to NHIs.
A question worth separating out:
Q: When should organisations replace standing privilege with just-in-time access?
A: Organisations should replace standing privilege with just-in-time access whenever elevated access is not required continuously. JIT reduces the time window in which credentials can be abused, especially for admin tasks, break-glass use, and sensitive automation. It works best when paired with approval, expiry, and logging so temporary access does not become another form of standing privilege.
👉 Read our full editorial: Third-party access governance is the missing control in supply chain risk