Manufacturers should treat password setup as only the first control in a broader security baseline. They also need regular software updates, patching against known threats, and designs that make secure configuration the default. Without those measures, a strong initial password can still sit on top of vulnerable firmware or exposed services, leaving the device unnecessarily open to compromise.
What manufacturers must add after first-use password changes
A forced password change is only a starting point. Manufacturers need a maintenance posture that keeps the device safe after deployment, because the real exposure usually comes from outdated software, weak defaults, and unpatched services rather than the initial password itself. If those issues remain, the device can be compromised even when the password is strong.
That means secure-by-default configuration, timely firmware and software updates, and a predictable patching process are part of the security baseline, not optional extras. NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 Security and Privacy Controls remains a useful reference point here because configuration management, system integrity, and access controls only work when the product can actually be updated and locked down.
Manufacturers should also minimise exposed services and harden the default operating state so that customers are not forced to compensate for weak product design. That includes removing unnecessary interfaces, shipping secure defaults, and making it hard to leave the device in a permissive state after installation.
Why password setup alone does not reduce compromise risk
The main limitation is that a password protects only one path into the device. If the firmware contains known vulnerabilities, if management ports are exposed, or if the product ships with insecure defaults, an attacker may bypass the login entirely. In other words, password hygiene does not compensate for an unsafe device posture.
This is why software maintenance matters as much as authentication. A device with a good password but obsolete code still carries exploitable flaws, and those flaws tend to be the easiest route for opportunistic attackers. Good practice is to treat patchability as a security feature: if updates are difficult, delayed, or unavailable, the device is already underprotected.
Current guidance from NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 and NIST AI Risk Management Framework points to the same operational reality across technology stacks: the control only works when the system can be maintained, monitored, and brought back to a known-good state after vulnerabilities emerge.
What secure product design should look like in practice
Manufacturers should design for secure onboarding, secure operation, and secure recovery. That means passwords are changed at first use, but also that default accounts are removed or constrained, insecure features are disabled unless explicitly needed, and update delivery is straightforward enough that customers can actually stay current.
For connected products, secure-by-default also means reducing the attack surface before the device reaches the customer. The fewer reachable services, legacy protocols, and unnecessary privileges the device exposes, the less likely a weak password or missed patch becomes a full compromise path.
OWASP Non-Human Identity Top 10 is useful as a broader reminder that modern products often rely on machine credentials, secrets, and service trust relationships, so secure design has to cover more than the human login screen. NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 Security and Privacy Controls also reinforces the need for configuration and integrity controls that keep the device in a hardened state over time.
Standards & Framework Alignment
This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.
NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and NIST CSF 2.0 set the governance and control requirements practitioners need to meet.
| Framework | Control / Reference | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 | CM-2 — Baseline Configuration | Secure defaults and hardening depend on controlled, known-good configurations. |
| SI-2 — Flaw Remediation | Patch management is central to reducing exposure from known device vulnerabilities. | |
| Recommendation — Define and maintain hardened baselines for device configuration before shipment and after updates. Establish a supported process to identify, test, and deploy firmware and software fixes quickly. | ||
| NIST CSF 2.0 | PR.IP-12 — Vulnerability Management | The question is about ongoing patching and secure maintenance beyond first-use authentication. |
| Recommendation — Run a vulnerability management process that keeps shipped devices aligned with current threats. | ||
Practitioner Guidance
What to prioritise: Treat updateability, secure defaults, and exposed-service reduction as release requirements, not post-sale advice. If the product cannot be patched or hardened reliably, the password policy is not enough.
What to verify: Confirm that first-use password setup is paired with a supported firmware update path, a documented patch cadence, and a default configuration that disables unnecessary interfaces before deployment.
Common mistake: Shipping a device that is “secure” only because the user must change a password once. That model breaks as soon as a vulnerability is published or a management port is left exposed.
Practitioner takeaway: The real security question is not whether the password changes at first use, but whether the manufacturer can keep the device hard to exploit after day one.
Related resources from NHI Mgmt Group
- What happens when organisations skip password rotation and first-use change controls for end users?
- How should security teams use IAST and RASP in NHI governance?
- Should organisations prioritise external exposure or internal credential governance first?
- When should organisations expand AI coverage beyond the first alert use case?
Deepen Your Knowledge
Reviewed and updated by the NHIMG editorial team on September 29, 2026.
NHI Mgmt Group — the #1 independent authority on Non-Human Identity, IAM, and Agentic AI security. nhimg.org
