Access Control: When Identity Isn’t the Weak Link, Security Still Fails
The Limitations of Identity-Centric Access Control in Modern Workforce Security
For years, identity has been the cornerstone of workforce security, with the assumption that verifying a user’s identity is sufficient to grant access to corporate resources. However, this approach no longer holds true in today’s complex and dynamic work environments. With employees accessing corporate networks from various locations, devices, and time zones, the traditional identity-centric access control model is struggling to keep pace.
The Problem with Identity-Centric Access Control
The problem lies not in the failure of identity authentication, but in the over-reliance on identity as a proxy for trust. While authentication can confirm a user’s identity, it does not provide insight into the risk associated with the access request. A legitimate user accessing systems from a secure device represents a different risk profile compared to the same user connecting from an outdated or compromised endpoint. Yet, many access models continue to treat these scenarios as equivalent, granting access primarily based on identity while neglecting device condition.
This approach fails to account for the dynamic nature of device risk, which can change rapidly after authentication. Endpoints can shift state due to configuration drift, security control disablement, or delayed updates, often long after access has been granted. As a result, access decisions remain tied to the conditions present at login, even as the underlying risk profile degrades.
Attackers are increasingly exploiting these blind spots by reusing misplaced trust rather than breaking authentication. A valid identity presented from a compromised device remains a reliable way to bypass modern controls and evade detection. According to Verizon’s Data Breach Investigation Report, stolen credentials are involved in 44.7% of breaches.
The Need for a More Comprehensive Approach
The concept of Zero Trust is widely accepted, but its application is often inconsistent, particularly across access paths outside modern conditional access frameworks. Establishing device trust introduces complexity that identity alone cannot address. Unmanaged and personal devices are difficult to assess consistently, and compliance checks are often static rather than continuous. Enforcement varies depending on how access is initiated, resulting in fragmented visibility and inconsistent decisions.
To address these challenges, organizations need to move beyond static, identity-centric access controls and adopt mechanisms that remain effective after authentication and adapt to changing conditions. Solutions that extend trust decisions beyond identity and maintain enforcement as conditions evolve are necessary. This includes verifying both user and device continuously, applying device-based access controls, enforcing security without disrupting legitimate work, and enabling self-service remediation to restore trust.
Implementing Zero-Trust Workforce Access
By adopting a more comprehensive approach to access control, organizations can reduce the effectiveness of stolen credentials, session tokens, and multi-factor authentication bypass techniques. This can be achieved by verifying both users and devices at every access point and continuously throughout each session, across various platforms. By doing so, organizations can enforce zero-trust workforce access that goes beyond identity and addresses the evolving nature of device risk.
About Author
English