The stolen credentials remain one of the most commonly used doors by the attackers to enter corporate networks: according to Verizon's latest report, they represent a significant proportion of the known initial access vectors. (see DBIR data). That reality is no surprise to anyone working in security: the real problem is not only that credentials are lost, but that, once inside, traditional architecture often delivers too wide permits and fragmented visibility, which allows intruders to move and scale privileges with relative freedom.
In theory, the Zero Trust philosophy - which is part of the premise of not giving implicit trust to any identity or device - should root out such attacks. In practice, however, many organizations confuse the adoption of Zero Trust controls with the implementation of a coherent identity strategy. When the measures are deployed as isolated elements - an MFA here, a firewall there - there are gaps among them that the adversaries exploit. For Zero Trust to function in a real and sustainable way, identity must be the central axis: rigorously governed, continuously validated and visible throughout the technological stack.

Apply Zero Trust with the identity in the center It means transforming how access is conceived, not just adding new tools. Instead of assuming that an authenticated session amounts to permission to move freely, each request for access must be broken down into checks on who requests, from which device, in what context and for how long. This paradigm shift reduces the attack surface and limits the impact of committed credentials.
One of the concrete pillars is the strict application of the principle of less privilege. In many companies permissions grow as by magic: job changes, temporary projects and forgotten accesses cause legitimate accounts to accumulate rights they no longer need. If an attacker compromises one of those accounts, inherit that overcapacity. Limiting access to the strictly necessary and granting privileges on a temporary and just-in@-@ time basis drastically reduces the potential damage and makes internal exploration much more expensive for the attacker.
Authentication must also cease to be a timely event. Techniques such as session kidnapping and tokens theft allow an intruder to circumvent initial controls and operate as a valid user. It is therefore increasingly necessary to establish continuous and context- aware authentication mechanisms that consider the health of the device, geolocation, the usual user behavior and other real-time risk factors. Tying identities to confidence devices and checking the endpoint's conformity before allowing access is an additional barrier that makes it difficult to abuse stolen credentials. Tools and approaches that integrate position verification of the device help automate these decisions and mitigate the risk of access from uncontrolled environments.
Another essential part is to limit lateral movement within the network. Zero Trust not only restricts initial access, but requires a verification for each jump: granular segmentation, microsegmentation and policies that require reauthentication or verification scaling when trying to access sensitive resources. This containment transforms incidents that could have become corporate gaps into isolated and manageable events, reducing the time and cost of the response.
Remote work and third-party access have multiplied entry points and thus increased risks. Treating employees, contractors and partners as "default-reliable" is no longer viable. Zero Trust proposes to treat each user and device as unreliable until it proves otherwise: access conditioned by verified identity, device posture and context. This allows consistent controls to be applied regardless of whether someone is connected from the office, from your home or from a supplier, and to revoke privileges immediately when conditions change.
The complexity grows when the environments spread through multiple clouds, inherited systems and SaaS applications. It is therefore critical to centralize governance and identity monitoring. A unique panel for access policies, permit reviews, authentication events and behavior analysis allows you to detect abnormal patterns and respond quickly. Automation in the life cycle of identities - provision, role changes and disprovision - reduces the accumulation of unnecessary permissions and exposure windows.
How to start without paralyzing the organization? The road to Zero Trust is gradual and practical. Many teams get immediate benefits by prioritizing high impact controls: introducing phishing-resistant authentication mechanisms and verifying device health is usually a starting point with clear return. From there, it is appropriate to establish temporary access to privileges, periodic rights audits, and a layer of visibility that correlates identity events with network telemetry and endpoints.
If you are looking for recognized technical references and working frameworks, the NIST guide on Zero Trust Architecture provides a solid conceptual framework (NIST SP 800-207), Microsoft publishes practical material and guides to move Zero Trust to real environments (Microsoft documentation) and the US Cyber Security Agency. USA (CISA) provides recommendations on the adoption of phishing-resistant multifactor authentication (CISA guide). To understand the techniques of session abduction and tokens theft, it is appropriate to review OWASP resources on session management (OWASP Session Management).
There are suppliers that offer specific tools for some of these challenges - for example, solutions that integrate device verification with identity-based access policies - and can facilitate implementation. While technology helps, success depends on design, governance and processes: automating the life cycle of identities, defining control metrics and regular reviews are essential steps for Zero Trust to stop being a collection of controls and become an effective identity-focused strategy.

At the end of the day, protecting identities is not an isolated technical option: it is a transformation that requires coordination between security, operations and business. Starting with high-impact controls, measuring results and evolving towards more sophisticated and automated policies allows for a rapid reduction of the attack surface and a much less dangerous threat to the stolen credentials.
If you are looking for concrete examples or demonstrations of solutions that combine device verification and identity control, you can consult specialized suppliers and compare approaches before designing your own road map. Information with official sources and recognized frameworks helps to avoid improvisations that generate false security sensations.
Recommended sources and readings: Verizon DRIR report https: / / www.verizon.com / business / en-gb / resources / reports / dbir /, NIST SP 800-207 https: / / www.nist.gov / publications / zero-trust-architecture, Microsoft Zero Trust guide https: / / learn.microsoft.com / en-us / security / zero-trust /, CISA recommendations on MFA https: / / www.cisa.gov / publication / implementing-multi-factor-authenthood and OWASP on session management https: / / cheatsheetseries.owasp.org / cheatsheets / Session _ Management _ Cheat _ Sheet.html. For information on solutions that link identity and device verification, you can explore resources from specialized suppliers such as Spacups and compare with other market offers.
Related
More news on the same subject.

18-year-old Ukrainian youth leads a network of infostealers that violated 28,000 accounts and left $250,000 in losses
The Ukrainian authorities, in coordination with US agents. They have focused on an operation of infostealer which, according to the Ukrainian Cyber Police, was allegedly adminis...

RAMPART and Clarity redefine the safety of IA agents with reproducible testing and governance from the start
Microsoft has presented two open source tools, RAMPART and Clarity, aimed at changing the way the safety of IA agents is tested: one that automates and standardizes technical te...

The digital signature is in check: Microsoft dismands a service that turned malware into apparently legitimate software
Microsoft announced the disarticulation of a "malware-signing-as-a-service" operation that exploited its device signature system to convert malicious code into seemingly legitim...

A single GitHub workflow token opened the door to the software supply chain
A single GitHub workflow token failed in the rotation and opened the door. This is the central conclusion of the incident in Grafana Labs following the recent wave of malicious ...

WebWorm 2025: the malware that is hidden in Discord and Microsoft Graphh to evade detection
The latest observations by cyber security researchers point to a change in worrying tactics of an actor linked to China known as WebWorm: in 2025 it has incorporated back doors ...

Identity is no longer enough: continuous verification of the device for real-time security
Identity remains the backbone of many security architectures, but today that column is cracking under new pressures: advanced phishing, real-time proxyan authentication kits and...

The dark matter of identity is changing the rules of corporate security
The Identity Gap: Snapshot 2026 report published by Orchid Security puts numbers to a dangerous trend: the "dark matter" of identity - accounts and credentials that are neither ...