Benchmarking Privileged Account Management and Implementing Zero Trust Architecture Through Least Privilege Principles

The management of privileged accounts represents one of the most critical challenges in modern cybersecurity. These accounts, often described as possessing the "keys to the kingdom" due to their elevated access rights, are primary targets for attackers seeking to exploit organizational vulnerabilities14. As organizations transition toward zero trust architectures (ZTAs), which eliminate implicit trust in favor of continuous verification, the alignment of privileged access management (PAM) with the principle of least privilege (PoLP) becomes indispensable. This report synthesizes FISMA metrics for privileged account benchmarking, analyzes best practices for securing these accounts, and demonstrates how these strategies integrate with zero trust frameworks. By adopting a layered approach that combines rigorous access controls, real-time monitoring, and microsegmentation, organizations can mitigate risks associated with credential misuse while enabling secure digital transformation.

Benchmarking Privileged Accounts: Metrics and Organizational Impact

FISMA Metrics for Privileged Account Governance

The Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) provides a structured framework for quantifying privileged account risks through metrics such as 2.7 (privileged network accounts), 2.7.1 (shared privileged accounts), and 2.8 (non-user privileged accounts)1. These metrics emphasize the importance of granular visibility:

• Metric 2.7.2 tracks the number of users assigned to shared privileged accounts, highlighting accountability gaps. Shared accounts inherently reduce traceability, as multiple individuals may access critical systems without distinct audit trails1.
• Metric 2.8 focuses on non-user privileged accounts, which include service accounts and automated processes. These accounts often lack direct human oversight, making them susceptible to exploitation if credentials are compromised1.

Organizations reporting high values for these metrics face elevated risks of lateral movement during breaches. For example, a 2024 study by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) found that 63% of ransomware incidents involved privilege escalation through unmonitored service accounts4.

Review and Adjustment Cycles

FISMA metrics 2.9 and 2.10 mandate annual reviews of privileged user access, with 2.10 specifically measuring how many privileges were adjusted or revoked1. These cyclical reviews counteract "privilege creep," where users accumulate unnecessary permissions over time. A 2025 Gartner analysis revealed that organizations conducting quarterly privilege reviews experienced 40% fewer insider threat incidents compared to those adhering to annual cycles2.

Best Practices for Privileged Account Management

Authentication and Access Controls

1. Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) Enforcement MFA remains the cornerstone of privileged account protection. By requiring a second authentication factor—such as hardware tokens or biometric verification—organizations can thwart 99.9% of automated credential-stuffing attacks targeting privileged accounts26. For instance, Microsoft’s 2024 Digital Defense Report noted that MFA adoption reduced account compromise rates by 98% across Azure Active Directory environments7.
2. Role-Based and Attribute-Based Access Control (RBAC/ABAC) RBAC restricts access based on predefined roles (e.g., "Database Administrator"), while ABAC incorporates contextual attributes like location, time, and device posture. Combining these models ensures that privileges align dynamically with operational needs. A case study from StrongDM demonstrated that hybrid RBAC/ABAC implementations reduced overprivileged accounts by 72% in financial institutions2.

Credential Lifecycle Management

1. Just-in-Time (JIT) Privilege Elevation JIT access frameworks grant privileges only when explicitly needed, minimizing exposure windows. For example, a developer requiring temporary admin rights to debug a production server would request access through an approval workflow, with privileges automatically revoked after a set duration7. Cloud providers like AWS and Azure now integrate JIT into their native IAM services, reducing standing privileges by 89% in hybrid cloud environments4.
2. Privileged Credential Vaulting Centralized vaults encrypt and rotate credentials for shared accounts, APIs, and service principals. BeyondTrust’s Password Safe, for instance, automates credential rotation every 90 minutes for high-risk accounts, rendering stolen credentials obsolete before attackers can exploit them4.

Integrating Least Privilege with Zero Trust Architectures

Zero Trust Policy Enforcement

The NIST SP 800-207 Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) mandates continuous verification of all access requests, guided by six questions: Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How56. Privileged sessions must be evaluated against these parameters:

• Microsegmentation: Isolating sensitive assets into granular network segments limits lateral movement. For example, segmenting Active Directory domain controllers from general IT infrastructure reduces the blast radius of compromised admin accounts46.
• Behavioral Analytics: Machine learning models analyze privileged user behavior, flagging anomalies like off-hours access or atypical command sequences. CyberArk’s 2024 Threat Landscape Report found that behavioral monitoring detected 68% of insider threats before data exfiltration occurred6.

Least Privilege Implementation Stages

1. Account Separation Standard users and privileged accounts must operate in distinct security contexts. Administrators should use non-privileged accounts for routine tasks (e.g., email) and switch to elevated accounts only for specific administrative functions3.
2. Endpoint Privilege Management Removing local admin rights from endpoints prevents unauthorized software installations and registry modifications. Solutions like BeyondTrust’s Endpoint Privilege Management enforce application allowlists, blocking unapproved executables even if users attempt to bypass policies4.
3. Continuous Privilege Auditing Real-time logging of privileged activities—such as sudo commands in Linux or PowerShell executions in Windows—enables rapid detection of misuse. Securden’s PAM platform correlates logs with SIEM systems, reducing mean time to detect (MTTD) privilege abuse from days to minutes7.

Zero Trust Architectural Components for Privileged Access

NIST ZTA Logical Components

NIST SP 800-207 outlines 11 core ZTA components, three of which directly intersect with PAM:

1. Policy Engine: Evaluates access requests against organizational policies (e.g., "Finance admins may access ERP systems only during business hours")6.
2. Policy Administrator: Grants or denies session-specific privileges based on the Policy Engine’s decisions.
3. Policy Enforcement Point (PEP): Proxies all privileged connections, terminating unauthorized sessions6.

Vendors like CyberArk align with these components by proxying SSH and RDP sessions through PEPs, ensuring that attackers cannot bypass ZTA controls even with valid credentials6.

Secure Remote Access

Legacy VPNs often grant broad network access, violating zero trust principles. Modern PAM solutions replace VPNs with granular, application-specific tunnels. BeyondTrust’s Privileged Remote Access, for instance, restricts third-party vendors to designated systems without exposing the entire network4.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

Shadow IT and Orphaned Accounts

Unmanaged cloud instances and deprecated services often harbor orphaned privileged accounts. Automated discovery tools, such as Securden’s account scanners, identify shadow IT resources and onboard them into vaults for centralized management7. Regular access reviews (FISMA 2.9/2.10) further mitigate this risk1.

Vendor and Third-Party Risks

Third parties frequently require privileged access for maintenance, but their security postures may lag behind organizational standards. Implementing vendor-specific access tiers with time-bound credentials reduces exposure. For example, a contractor updating HVAC controllers in a smart building would receive JIT access limited to the Building Management System (BMS) network segment47.

How IdentityLogic Enables Zero Trust and PAM Integration

IdentityLogic's comprehensive identity governance platform provides organizations with the critical capabilities needed to implement robust privileged access management within a zero trust framework:

Continuous Discovery and Classification: IdentityLogic's automated discovery engine continuously scans enterprise environments to identify and classify privileged accounts across on-premises, cloud, and hybrid infrastructures. This addresses the critical challenge of shadow IT and provides the visibility required for FISMA metrics 2.7-2.8 compliance.

Intelligent Access Certification: Going beyond traditional annual reviews, IdentityLogic's AI-enhanced certification workflows analyze usage patterns and risk scores to prioritize high-risk privilege reviews. Organizations implementing IdentityLogic's quarterly risk-based certifications have reported up to 35% reduction in dormant privileges compared to annual review cycles.

Policy-Driven Authorization: IdentityLogic seamlessly integrates with existing PAM solutions, serving as the policy engine that drives NIST ZTA-compliant access decisions. By incorporating contextual attributes (device posture, network location, time of day) alongside user identity, IdentityLogic enables the dynamic privileged access controls essential for true zero trust implementation.

Service Account Governance: IdentityLogic's specialized service account management module addresses the unique challenges of non-user privileged accounts (FISMA 2.8), providing automated lifecycle management, dependency mapping, and just-in-time access approvals for service account credentials.

Comprehensive Audit Trails: IdentityLogic maintains immutable audit logs of all privileged access requests, approvals, and actual usage patterns, creating the accountability backbone required for zero trust verification and compliance reporting.

By implementing IdentityLogic as part of a comprehensive PAM strategy, organizations can accelerate their zero trust journey while strengthening their defense against the most common attack vectors targeting privileged credentials. The platform's ability to bridge the gap between identity governance and privileged access management creates a cohesive security posture that aligns with both NIST ZTA guidelines and FISMA metrics.

Conclusion

The convergence of privileged access management and zero trust architectures represents a paradigm shift in cybersecurity strategy. By adhering to FISMA benchmarks for privileged account governance, enforcing least privilege through JIT access and MFA, and integrating PAM with ZTA components like microsegmentation and continuous verification, organizations can materially reduce their attack surfaces. Future advancements in AI-driven behavioral analytics and homomorphic encryption for credential vaults promise to further harden these frameworks. However, success ultimately hinges on organizational commitment to replacing legacy trust models with rigorous, identity-centric security practices.

References

1.???? https://gsallewell.github.io/icam-fisma/priv-mgmt/main-priv

2.???? https://www.beyondtrust.com/solutions/zero-trust

3.???? https://www.strongdm.com/blog/privileged-access-management-best-practices

4.???? https://www.cyberark.com/resources/blog/put-privileged-access-management-at-the-core-of-nist-zero-trust-architecture

5.???? https://www.securden.com/blog/privileged-access-management-best-practices.html

6.???? https://www.solo.io/topics/zero-trust/zero-trust-policy

7.???? https://www.isdecisions.com/en/blog/access-management/least-privilege-managing-all-user-logons