lgkm.org

Field notes · 19 October 2026 · Identity and access

Machine identities outnumber people; few organisations can list them

In plain words: Computer programs hold far more passwords and keys than people do, and most organisations cannot list them or say who looks after each one. Identity and access, explained simply

In short

How big the gap is

CyberArk's 2025 Identity Security Landscape surveyed 2,600 security decision makers in 20 countries. They reported 82 machine identities for every human one, and said 42% of those machine identities have access to sensitive or privileged systems. Yet 88% said their definition of a "privileged user" covers only people. A vendor survey is not a census, so read the exact numbers with care, but the direction matches what anyone who has tried to count will find.

The secrets behind these identities also leak. GitGuardian found about 23.8 million new secrets in public GitHub repositories during 2024, and around 70% of the secrets it found leaked in 2022 still worked. Private repositories were worse, not better: 35% of them contained at least one secret.

Where it actually breaks

In November 2023 an attacker got into Cloudflare's internal wiki, ticketing system and source code. The way in was one access token and three service account credentials stolen weeks earlier in the Okta support breach. Cloudflare had rotated thousands of credentials after that breach and missed those four, "because mistakenly it was believed they were unused." The clean-up afterwards meant rotating every production credential, more than 5,000 of them.

In August 2025 Google's threat intelligence team described a group that used stolen OAuth tokens from the Salesloft Drift chat integration to pull data out of many organisations' Salesforce instances. The tokens belonged to an integration, not to a person, so no one's sign-in was challenged. The attackers then searched the stolen data for more secrets, such as cloud access keys and passwords. Google's advice was to treat every token connected to the integration as compromised, and to revoke and rotate them.

Both stories have the same shape. The credentials worked, nobody was watching them, and no one could quickly say which ones existed or what they opened.

Why they escape the usual controls

People leave, change roles and get reviewed. Machine identities do none of that. A developer creates a service account for a project, the project ends, and the account carries on with the access it had on its last day. OWASP's Non-Human Identities Top 10 for 2025 reads like a list of those habits: improper offboarding first, then leaked secrets, risky third-party identities, too much privilege, long-lived secrets, and people signing in with a machine's account.

My own view is that the root problem is ownership. An identity with no named owner has no one to ask whether it is still needed, so the safe answer, "leave it", wins every time.

What to do on Monday

Sources

Follow with the feed

Personal work and my own view, not my employer's. Sources are public.