They often assume visibility exists once an account is created in a directory or vault. In practice, many organisations cannot fully inventory service accounts, tokens, and agent identities, which means they cannot prove who owns them or where they are used. Visibility must include discovery, ownership, and real access paths.
Why This Matters for Security Teams
Visibility is not just an inventory problem. For non-human identities, the real risk is that access can be active, inherited, or embedded in automation long after the account is “known” to a directory or vault. NHI Management Group’s Ultimate Guide to NHIs — Key Challenges and Risks notes that only 5.7% of organisations have full visibility into service accounts, which shows how often teams mistake partial discovery for operational control. That gap matters because unknown ownership means no reliable remediation path when secrets leak or privileges drift.
Security teams also underestimate how often visibility failures surface in real incidents rather than during planned reviews. NIST’s Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 treats asset and access governance as a continuous discipline, not a one-time reconciliation exercise. In practice, many organisations discover NHI sprawl only after a CI/CD token, service account, or API key has already been reused in places no one had mapped.
How It Works in Practice
Useful NHI visibility starts with discovery, then proves ownership, then traces where each identity actually authenticates. That sequence matters because an account record alone does not reveal whether the identity is still active, whether it is shared, or whether it is embedded in code, pipelines, workloads, or third-party integrations. The best guidance is evolving, but current practice consistently points to combining directory data, secret scanning, cloud audit logs, and workload telemetry.
A practical visibility workflow usually includes:
- Inventory service accounts, API keys, certificates, OAuth apps, and agent identities across cloud, SaaS, and CI/CD.
- Attach an owner, system of record, and business purpose to every identity.
- Map each identity to real authentication paths, not just its storage location.
- Track last use, privilege scope, rotation state, and dependencies on other systems.
- Continuously reconcile findings against NHI Lifecycle Management Guide controls so dormant identities do not remain trusted by default.
Teams should also assume that secrets may exist outside formal vaults. NHIMG research shows that 96% of organisations store secrets outside secrets managers in vulnerable locations, and 80% of identity breaches involved compromised non-human identities. That makes visibility an operational control, not a documentation task. NIST’s CSF 2.0 reinforces that identification and monitoring must span the full environment, including ephemeral workloads and third-party pathways. These controls tend to break down in high-churn DevOps environments because identities are created and consumed faster than periodic reviews can reconcile them.
Common Variations and Edge Cases
Tighter visibility often increases operational overhead, requiring organisations to balance audit depth against engineering speed. That tradeoff is most visible in cloud-native estates, where short-lived workloads, ephemeral tokens, and dynamic service discovery can make static reports stale within hours. There is no universal standard for how often every NHI should be revalidated, but current guidance suggests prioritising continuous signals for high-risk identities and periodic reconciliation for lower-risk ones.
Edge cases often expose the weakness of directory-centric thinking. An NHI may appear “known” because it exists in IAM, yet still lack a named owner, a clear workload relationship, or a revoke path if it is embedded in scripts, containers, or vendor-managed integrations. NHIMG’s Top 10 NHI Issues and the JetBrains GitHub plugin token exposure example both show the same pattern: visibility gaps become breach paths when secrets are scattered across developer tools and automation chains. In those environments, “inventory complete” can still mean “attack surface unknown.”
Standards & Framework Alignment
This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.
OWASP Non-Human Identity Top 10 address the attack and risk surface, while NIST CSF 2.0 and NIST AI RMF set the governance and control requirements practitioners need to meet.
| Framework | Control / Reference | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| OWASP Non-Human Identity Top 10 | NHI-01 | Covers NHI discovery gaps and missing inventory accuracy. |
| NIST CSF 2.0 | ID.AM | Asset management is the core control family for NHI visibility. |
| NIST AI RMF | GOVERN | Governance is needed to assign accountability for autonomous or automated identities. |
Define ownership, oversight, and review cadence for all non-human identities and their access paths.
Related resources from NHI Mgmt Group
Deepen Your Knowledge
Reviewed and updated by the NHIMG editorial team on June 24, 2026.
NHI Mgmt Group — the #1 independent authority on Non-Human Identity, IAM, and Agentic AI security. nhimg.org
