App-Specific Passwords Explained: How They Work, and Why They’re Risky

Read full article here: https://astrix.security/learn/blog/app-specific-passwords-origins-functionality-security-risks/?utm_source=nhimg

As Google officially ends support for Less Secure Apps (LSAs) on September 30, the spotlight turns to their successor — App-Specific Passwords (ASPs). While ASPs were introduced as a more secure alternative, their evolution also exposes a persistent set of identity security risks that organizations can no longer ignore. Understanding how ASPs work, their security limitations, and how to mitigate their risks is crucial for enterprises managing large-scale SaaS and cloud integrations.

From Less Secure Apps to App-Specific Passwords

Before modern identity protocols like OAuth became the standard, LSAs were the norm. These older applications required users to share full account credentials to access Google data such as Gmail or Calendar — granting unrestricted access to the entire account and disabling multi-factor authentication (MFA) in the process. While once practical, LSAs created massive attack surfaces that attackers exploited through credential theft and phishing campaigns.

To fix this, Google introduced App-Specific Passwords — unique, 16-character passwords that enable apps to connect securely without requiring a user’s main password. ASPs solved the MFA compatibility issue by isolating app access, but they also introduced new identity management blind spots.

How App-Specific Passwords Work

Each ASP acts as a dedicated credential for a single application, allowing limited access to Google services like Gmail, Calendar, and Contacts. Unlike LSAs, these passwords can’t modify security settings or access all Google Workspace resources. This fine-grained access model allows users to retain MFA for regular logins while keeping older apps functional.

However, the isolation comes with a trade-off: once generated, ASPs operate independently of traditional monitoring, logging, and lifecycle controls. This lack of visibility makes them difficult to audit — especially in large organizations with thousands of users and integrations.

Security Risks of App-Specific Passwords

Despite being an improvement over LSAs, ASPs introduce several notable risks:

• MFA Bypass: Applications using ASPs can access user accounts protected by MFA, effectively bypassing the added security layer.
• Lack of Visibility: Security teams cannot easily track or revoke ASP usage. Once issued, these credentials can remain active indefinitely without oversight.
• Expanded Attack Surface: Each ASP represents a new potential entry point. Compromised ASPs can allow attackers to infiltrate accounts without triggering typical MFA or anomaly detection alerts.

Real-world monitoring by Astrix shows that more than 60% of corporate environments contain users who have created ASPs — often multiple per user. Many of these are linked to outdated systems or third-party integrations that have long been abandoned, creating unmanaged and invisible risks.

How to Detect and Manage ASPs

Identifying all ASPs in an organization can be surprisingly difficult. Google Workspace administrators must manually inspect each user’s account under the “Security” tab to view their generated ASPs. Although Google offers the asps.list API endpoint, ASP activity is not yet visible in standard audit logs or security reports — a major gap for enterprise-level visibility and governance.

For large organizations, this lack of centralized monitoring creates a blind spot similar to unmanaged non-human identities (NHIs). Unused or stale ASPs can persist long after their corresponding applications are gone, providing silent backdoors into sensitive corporate data.

Mitigating ASP-Related Risks

To reduce the risks associated with App-Specific Passwords, organizations should implement a structured security approach:

1. Audit and Discovery: Regularly scan for all users with active ASPs using Google Admin APIs or third-party visibility tools.
2. Rotation and Deactivation: Remove unused or outdated ASPs and enforce time-bound expiration policies where possible.
3. Policy Enforcement: Disable ASP creation for users unless absolutely necessary and migrate legacy integrations to OAuth-based authentication.
4. Monitoring and Detection: Use advanced anomaly detection systems to flag suspicious activity or credential abuse from ASP-linked applications.

The Broader Lesson: Securing Non-Human Identities

App-Specific Passwords are just one manifestation of a much larger problem — the explosion of Non-Human Identities (NHIs) across SaaS and cloud ecosystems. Each token, key, or credential represents an independent identity that must be discovered, monitored, and secured. The Astrix platform extends visibility and governance to these overlooked identities, helping organizations understand who — or what — has access, and how those privileges are being used in real time.

By managing ASPs as part of a holistic NHI security strategy, organizations can close critical gaps in identity protection, enforce least-privilege access, and strengthen their overall security posture.