Physical security systems are highly connected environments, but the way credentials and access permissions are managed remains fragmented, inconsistent and heavily dependent on manual oversight.
As AI-driven phishing, credential harvesting and social engineering attacks continue to rise, weaknesses in governance across physical security systems are receiving far greater scrutiny. Recent industry research found 58.7% of organisations experienced an increase in phishing and smishing attacks, while 43.5% identified social engineering as a primary attack method.
Across many organisations, it is still common to find shared administrator accounts, contractor access remaining active long after projects have finished, or devices operating with credentials that have not been reviewed in years.
Convenience Still Overrides Governance
One of the biggest challenges within physical security environments is when operational convenience takes priority over governance.
Shared logins simplify access for multiple team and long-standing permissions prevent delays when contractors require system access. Firmware updates are postponed because systems are considered operationally critical and downtime is difficult to schedule.
These decisions create environments where organisations lose clear visibility of who has access, how permissions are managed and where accountability sits.
The challenge becomes greater as physical security systems expand across multiple sites and integrate with wider business infrastructure. Many estates have evolved over several years using different suppliers, technologies and operational requirements. Governance processes rarely mature at the same pace.
The Divide Between Physical Security and Cybersecurity Still Exists
Responsibility for physical security systems may sit across facilities, estates, operations, security teams, IT departments or external providers. This fragmented ownership can create gaps in credential management, access reviews and governance.
An inactive account may remain live because offboarding responsibilities are split across departments. Remote access credentials may be shared between contractors because it simplifies support. Firmware updates may continue to be delayed because downtime is difficult to schedule.
Individually, these decisions may appear low risk, but across large estates they accumulate into broader operational and cybersecurity exposure.
As physical security systems become more integrated with wider digital infrastructure, governance weaknesses are becoming far more significant from a resilience and risk management perspective. Access control systems, visual surveillance platforms and remote management tools now operate in environments where authentication, permissions and device access must align with wider cybersecurity governance.
Connected Devices Are Increasing the Pressure
Credential governance discussions often focus on users, but connected devices are adding another layer of complexity.
Cameras, intercoms, controllers, servers and edge devices all require secure authentication and administration. Across large estates, the number of connected endpoints can quickly become difficult to manage consistently without centralised governance processes.
This is driving greater focus on certificate-based authentication, centralised credential management and stronger access controls across connected infrastructure. Organisations are under increasing pressure to maintain clear visibility of who and what has access to systems, how credentials are managed and where accountability sits.
Security Maturity Is Increasingly Operational
Many organisations already have advanced security technology in place. The bigger differentiator is increasingly how effectively those systems are governed over time.
Maintaining accurate access records, routinely reviewing permissions, limiting unnecessary privileges and removing dormant accounts are not particularly high-profile activities, but they are becoming critical indicators of resilience and operational maturity.
As physical security continues to converge with wider digital infrastructure, organisations are likely to face greater scrutiny around how access, authentication and accountability are managed across their estates.
For many businesses, the challenge is identifying where operational habits, fragmented ownership and inconsistent governance may already be creating unnecessary exposure.
How Amthal Group Can Help
Amthal Group supports organisations in strengthening governance across complex physical security environments through consultancy, system design, maintenance and ongoing support.
By helping businesses improve visibility, tighten access management and align physical security systems with wider cyber risk requirements, Amthal focuses on building resilient, well-governed infrastructure that remains secure over time.