What to Expect in this Blog:

In Part 2 of the Identity Security Intelligence series, we move beyond discovery to the real objective: prevention. You’ll learn how to operationalize identity intelligence through dynamic, automated controls enforcing least privilege, governing privileged access, and detecting risky behavior to proactively reduce your identity attack surface.

‍

In Part 1 of this series of blogs on Identity Security Intelligence, we explored why Identity Discovery is the critical first step in understanding and managing your organization’s modern attack surface. But discovery alone isn’t enough. Knowing which identities exist and what they can access sets the stage. The real impact comes when you act on that intelligence—by putting the right security controls in place to govern identities, enforce least privilege, and proactively reduce identity-related risk.

Welcome to the enforcement phase of Identity Security Intelligence (ISI).

‍

From Discovery to Defense: Why Controls Are the Next Frontier

Once you’ve surfaced every human, non-human (NHI), machine, and service identity,: and mapped their entitlements across environments, – the next question becomes: what do you do with that knowledge?

This is where many organizations hit a wall. The gap between insight and action is often bridged manually, with fragmented processes and point-in-time audits. But attackers don’t wait for your next quarterly review.

To operationalize identity intelligence, organizations need a controls framework that isare:

• Dynamic – Adapts to changing roles, environments, and behaviors.
• Automated – Scales with cloud-native architectures and ephemeral workloads.
• Context-aware – Informed by the risk posture of each identity and privilege.
  
  

‍

Key Pillars of Identity Security Controls

To make identity intelligence actionable, enforcement must span five key areas:

‍

1. Least Privilege Enforcement

Why it matters: Excessive access is one of the most common and dangerous identity risks. Most breaches involve over-permissioned users, stale admin rights, or standing access that attackers can weaponize.

What to do:

• Automatically compare actual entitlements against job functions.
• Use identity risk scoring to prioritize over-privileged identities.
• Remove or downgrade unused, outdated, or unnecessary permissions.
• Leverage just-in-time (JIT) access for privileged tasks to eliminate standing access.
  
  

Example: A DevOps engineer with permanent Admin access to all production accounts is a liability. With JIT access, they can request privilege temporarily, with approval and auditing built in.

‍

2. Privileged Access Governance

Why it matters: Privileged accounts—human and machine—are high-value targets. If compromised, they can grant unrestricted access to sensitive data or systems.

What to do:

• Centralize control through PAM platforms or privileged access workflows.
• Monitor privileged sessions in real time, (including service account behaviors).
• Use multi-factor authentication (MFA) and conditional access for all privileged identities.
• Rotate secrets and credentials frequently—automate where possible.
  
  

Example: A service account running backups across multiple databases should be scoped tightly, monitored continuously, and have keys rotated regularly to reduce risk.

‍

3. Access Lifecycle Management

Why it matters: Identities evolve—people change roles, leave organizations, or take on temporary projects. Without lifecycle management, access persists far beyond necessity.

What to do:

• Integrate with HR systems or identity lifecycle tools to automatically adjust access based on joiner-mover-leaver events.
• Define role-based access control (RBAC) and enforce provisioning rules.
• Regularly review and re-certify access for high-risk roles and sensitive systems.
  
  

Example: A finance intern who transfers to marketing should not retain access to payroll and financial reporting tools. Automating revocation helps prevent avoids lingering access.

‍

4. Identity Behavior Monitoring

Why it matters: Even well-configured identities can be compromised. Behavioral context is key to detecting misuse, anomalies, and early signs of intrusion.

What to do:

• Establish baselines for normal identity behavior (logins, systems accessed, time of day, etc.).
• Detect deviations—like sudden spikes in access, data exfiltration patterns, or privilege escalation.
• Integrate with UEBA (User and Entity Behavior Analytics) tools and threat detection systems.
  
  

Example: If a service account that usually runs database jobs starts making API calls to billing systems at midnight, that should trigger investigation.

‍

5. Policy and Automation-Driven Remediation

Why it matters: Manual cleanup of access and privileges doesn’t scale. Automation ensures consistency, speed, and resilience against human error.

What to do:

• Define policies that trigger automatic actions—e.g., disable orphaned accounts after X days of inactivity.
• Automate access reviews and alerts for high-risk privilege combinations.
• Use policy-as-code for cloud entitlements and infrastructure roles (e.g., Terraform + OPA).
  
  

Example: If an AWS user gains permissions that violates a least privilege policy, automation should flag it immediately and, optionally, remove excess access.

‍

Security Intelligence in Action: From Detection to Prevention

By enforcing identity controls aligned with intelligence, you shift from reactive to proactive defense. Examples include:

• Proactively preventing privilege escalation by detecting lateral paths through identity graph analysis.
• Blocking anomalous access from non-compliant locations or devices using conditional access policies.
• Auto-revoking stale entitlements through risk-based automation tied to inactivity thresholds.
• Identifying separation-of-duties violations (e.g., a user who can both initiate and approve financial transactions).
  
  

This isn’t just about better security—it’s better governance and reduced risk.

‍

What Makes Identity Control Effective?

Identity Security Intelligence becomes powerful when insight leads to intervention. The most effective enforcement models share the following traits:

• Visibility-driven: Based on complete, contextual discovery of identities and privileges.
• Risk-prioritized: Driven by real-time scoring, not static role definitions.
• Integrated: Connected interoperability between IAM, PAM, SIEM, and cloud security platforms.
• Adaptive: Responds to changing conditions—cloud resource drift, org changes, identity posture shifts.
• Auditable: Leaves a clear trail for compliance, incident investigation, and accountability.
  
  

‍

Getting Started: Operationalizing Identity Security Controls

If you’ve already begun identity discovery, the next steps involve turning that visibility into action:

1. Audit your current identity and privilege landscape for excess access and orphaned identities.
2. Define your control framework—least privilege, privilege review, access lifecycle, monitoring, and remediation.
3. Automate where possible—access revocation, risk scoring, and provisioning.
4. Continuously monitor identity behaviors and privilege drift across environments.
5. Integrate ISI into broader detection and response pipelines for holistic threat defense.
   
   

‍

The Bottom Line

Discovery gives you awareness. Control gives you power.

Without enforcement, Identity Security Intelligence is just data. With the right controls, it becomes a force multiplier—reducing attack surface, stopping privilege abuse, and elevating your security maturity.

In today’s landscape, where identity is both the front door and the battleground, defenders need more than visibility. They need automated, adaptive, intelligence-informed control over every identity, privilege, and entitlement.

Because in the end, you don’t just want to know what’s out there. You want to secure it.

Blind spots in identity are today’s biggest security risk. Here’s how to fix them.‍

‍

In today’s hyper-connected and threat-saturated digital landscape, one truth is rapidly becoming self-evident to defenders across every industry: identity is the new perimeter, and access is the new security. As traditional network boundaries dissolve in favor of hybrid and cloud-first infrastructures, adversaries are increasingly pivoting toward the exploitation of identities—privileged accounts, service identities, orphaned users, misconfigured roles—as the primary path to breach and move laterally within environments.

But here’s the catch: you can’t protect what you don’t know exists. This is where Identity Security Intelligence becomes not just useful but essential. And at the core of that intelligence lies a foundational capability: Identity Discovery.

‍

What is Identity Security Intelligence?

Identity Security Intelligence (ISI) is the ability to aggregate, analyze, and act on data about identities, their associated roles, privileges, behaviors, and risks across the entirety of an organization’s infrastructure—from on-premises directories to SaaS applications and multi-cloud platforms.

Think of it as the intersection between Identity and Access Management (IAM), risk analytics, and threat detection. It’s not just about managing identities; it’s about understanding them deeply—who they are, what they can do, where they exist, and how they behave over time.

‍

The Foundation: Identity Discovery

Before an organization can reason intelligently about identity risk, it must first discover all identities that exist across its environment. This includes:

• Traditional/On-Prem Identities: Users in Active Directory, service accounts in legacy apps, local admin accounts on servers, etc.
• Cloud Identities: Identities in Azure AD, AWS IAM users and roles, Google Workspace users, cloud-native service principals, API keys, containers, and ephemeral workloads.
• Shadow and Orphaned Identities: Legacy accounts no longer linked to active users, leftover access from decommissioned applications, services, and mismanaged credentials hiding in infrastructure-as-code.

A robust Identity Discovery capability surfaces all these identities, —whether they’re centralized or scattered, active or dormant, human or non-human.

‍

Why Identity Discovery is Challenging (Yet So Crucial)

The complexity arises from the fact that identity is now distributed. No longer tethered to one central directory, identities live in different silos across multiple environments and systems. Each cloud provider has its own model. Each SaaS app may define roles and entitlements differently. Each legacy system might still have its own local accounts.

This fragmented landscape creates massive blind spots:

• Privileged accounts in cloud environments that bypass central logging.
• Orphaned identities with persistent access to sensitive data.
• Service accounts with excessive, never-reviewed permissions.
• Redundant roles due to M&A, org restructuring, or tool proliferation.

Without discovery, these blind spots can easily lead to compromised credentials.

‍

Beyond Inventory: Discovering Roles, Privileges, and Entitlements

Discovery doesn’t stop at listing accounts. To enable true security intelligence, you must also map the roles, privileges, and entitlements tied to each identity.

This means answering questions like:

• What can this identity do?
• Where can it go?
• What data can it access?
• What systems does it control?
• Are these privileges aligned with its purpose?

For example, discovering an AWS IAM user is useful. But understanding that the user has AdministratorAccess across multiple production accounts—and the account hasn’t logged in for 90 days—is critical.

Or take an identity in Microsoft 365 that has full mailbox access across HR, Finance, and Legal departments. Is that intended? Necessary? Or a remnant of an old project no one cleaned up?

Mapping these entitlements and privilege chains across your hybrid estate helps you:

• Identify toxic combinations of access.
• Enforce the principle of least privilege.
• Detect privilege escalation paths.
• Uncover misconfigurations before attackers do.

‍

Identity Risk: The Unseen Attack Surface

The more fragmented and complex your identity environment, the greater your exposure. Attackers thrive in this chaos.

From techniques like Kerberoasting, Golden SAML, and token theft, to exploiting cloud misconfigurations and unused admin roles, modern adversaries are experts at chaining together identity weaknesses and misconfigurations.

By contrast, organizations that maintain a comprehensive view of identity risk across the board can:

• Detect anomalous behavior in context (e.g., a service account accessing finance systems for the first time).
• Shut down dormant or orphaned accounts.
• Flag privilege drift over time.
• Simulate attack paths based on current entitlements.
• Proactively remediate risk without waiting for incidents.

‍

What Makes Identity Security Intelligence Actionable?

Let’s be clear: data alone is not intelligence. Intelligence emerges when data is correlated, contextualized, and operationalized.

An effective Identity Security Intelligence program must provide:

• Continuous Discovery: Real-time or near-real-time visibility into new, removed, or changed identities.
• Entitlement Mapping: Deep visibility into fine-grained privileges across cloud and on-prem environments.
• Risk Analytics: Automated scoring based on behavior, privilege level, and exposure.
• Historical Context: Identity behavior over time—who did what, when, and whether it deviated from the norm.
• Integrations: Feeds into SIEM, SOAR, and IAM/PAM platforms for proactive and reactive response.

This turns identity data into strategic insight—fuel for critical decisions in security operations, compliance, audits, and incident response.

‍

Getting Started: Build Your Identity Intelligence Baseline

If your organization is just starting down this path, here’s a basic roadmap:

1. Inventory all identities—human, service, machine—across on-prem and cloud.
2. Map entitlements for each identity across applications, infrastructure, and data.
3. Assess privilege levels and compare against business needs and least privilege standards.
4. Identify toxic combinations—privilege escalations, cross-boundary access, unused high-risk roles.
5. Establish continuous discovery and monitoring, not just point-in-time scans.
6. Feed this intelligence into your risk models and threat detection systems.

‍

The Bottom Line

In the same way that endpoint detection changed the game a decade ago, Identity Security Intelligence is becoming table stakes for defending against modern threats. Attackers know that identity is the weakest link in many organizations. Our job as defenders is to turn it into a strength.

By investing in identity discovery—including deep insight into roles, entitlements, and privileges—you build a clear, contextual picture of your true identity surface. Only then can you manage it, reduce it, and defend it with confidence.

In a world where credentials are more valuable than malware, identity intelligence isn’t just good hygiene—it’s your first line of defense.

In the latest episode of the Security by Default podcast, host Joe Carson sits down with seasoned cybersecurity expert Filipi Pires for a thought-provoking conversation on one of the most critical—and often overlooked—aspects of modern security: identity threats.

With over a decade of experience spanning both technical and sales roles, Filipi brings a well-rounded perspective to the discussion, highlighting the growing importance of identity in the evolving cybersecurity landscape. Their conversation offers valuable lessons for practitioners, business leaders, and anyone invested in building more resilient, security-conscious organizations.

Why Identity Is the New Battleground

In today’s threat landscape, identity has become a prime target for attackers. As Filipi points out, it’s no longer just about exploiting systems or networks. Gaining access to identities unlocks the keys to the kingdom.

“Identity is central to everything we do in security,” Filipi explains. “If you compromise an identity, you bypass so many of the traditional controls.”

This shift has elevated the role of identity threats from phishing and credential theft to privilege escalation and misuse of misconfigured accounts. Yet many organizations still underestimate how misconfigurations, overlooked credentials, and legacy identity systems can quietly erode their defenses.

‍

Misconfigurations: The Silent Weakness

One of the recurring challenges discussed in the episode is the persistent problem of misconfigurations. Despite advancements in technology, simple oversights—such as exposed administrative accounts, poorly managed permissions, or forgotten legacy systems—remain among the top causes of breaches.

Filipi emphasizes that misconfigurations aren’t always the result of negligence. Often, they stem from complexity, rapid growth, or lack of visibility. That’s where the concept of observability becomes critical.

“You can’t secure what you can’t see,” Filipi reminds us. “Observability gives you the insight to spot weak points before attackers do.”

‍

Tools Are Just the Beginning

With countless cybersecurity tools flooding the market, Filipi and Joe caution against becoming overly reliant on technology without understanding the underlying techniques.

“Tools are there to help you learn and uncover patterns,” Filipi says. “But if you don’t understand how attackers operate, the tools alone won’t save you.”

This mindset aligns with the growing emphasis on research, experimentation, and reverse engineering in the community. It’s through continuous learning and hands-on exploration that defenders stay ahead of adversaries.

‍

Community, Learning, and Respecting the Journey

Beyond technical skills, both Filipi and Joe underscore the importance of community engagement in cybersecurity. Conferences, podcasts, online forums, and mentorship all play vital roles in building collective knowledge.

Filipi shares a personal reminder for anyone navigating their cybersecurity career: 

“Respect the journey. Everyone starts somewhere, and growth comes from persistence and curiosity.”

Whether you’re a seasoned expert or just starting out, cybersecurity is a field where being humble, learning, and community matter as much as technical prowess.

‍

Final Thoughts: Building Identity-Aware, Resilient Security

This episode reinforces a key message for modern defenders: protecting identities isn’t optional—it’s foundational to cybersecurity resilience.

By addressing misconfigurations, prioritizing observability, leveraging tools with purpose, and staying engaged with the community, organizations can build stronger defenses against evolving identity threats.

As the conversation between Filipi Pires and Joe Carson reminds us, effective cybersecurity is never static. It’s a continuous process of learning, adapting, and respecting the complex, human-driven journey that defines our industry.

‍

Listen to the full podcast episode on the Security by Default podcast Now!

‍

Catch Filipi Pires at Three Cybersecurity Conferences This August

Filipi Pires is hitting the summer circuit with a powerful trio of talks across BSides Las Vegas, Black Hat USA, and DEF CON 33 each focused on identity, cloud misconfigurations, and practical security tooling.

• 📍 BSides Las Vegas
  Talk: Machine Identity & Attack Path: The Danger of Misconfigurations
  Date & Time: Tuesday, August 5 | 2:00–2:45 PM (GMT+1)
  Filipi explores how attackers exploit misconfigured security and unmanaged machine identities in multi-cloud environments. Learn how to visualize IAM risks using open-source tools like SecBridge, Cartography, and AWSPX.
• 📍 Black Hat USA – Arsenal Station 3
  Talk: APIDetector v3 – Advanced Swagger Endpoint Scanner with Real-time Web Interface
  Date & Time: Thursday, August 7 | 1:00–1:55 PM
  Get hands-on with APIDetector v3, the latest version of an advanced tool for finding exposed Swagger/OpenAPI endpoints. Now with real-time results, screenshot capture, and bulk scanning support.
• 📍 DEF CON 33 – Cloud Village
  Talk: Transforming Identity Protection: Innovating with AI and Attack Paths
  Date & Time: Friday, August 8 | 2:10–2:40 PM (GMT+1)
  Discover how generative AI and graph visualizations can predict and prevent misconfigurations across AWS, Azure, GCP, and OCI. Filipi showcases tools like Neo4j and Memgraph to map identity risk and attack paths in the cloud.

Whether you’re a cloud defender, API hunter, or identity strategist, Filipi’s talks deliver the tools and insights to secure your ecosystem against today’s threats.

‍

If you want to see firsthand how protecting identities can transform your organization’s security, don’t miss the chance to discover Segura®’s platform. 
‍

Our solution is designed to help organizations identify vulnerabilities, prevent misconfigurations, and enhance visibility into identity usage—all in a simple and effective way. 

Ready to take the next step toward truly resilient defense? Request a free demo of Segura® now and discover how we can strengthen your company’s security together!

Executive Summary

This article presents a detailed analysis of one of the most severe cybersecurity incidents ever to impact Brazil’s Payment System (Sistema de Pagamentos Brasileiro – SPB), which occurred in June and July of 2025. The breach was directly linked to C&M Software, a major Information Technology Services Provider (PSTI) for the national banking sector. This incident exposed, for the first time at this scale, the critical role PSTIs play within the financial ecosystem, and how internal vulnerabilities can reverberate systemically, compromising the integrity of financial operations across hundreds of banks and institutions.

The Brazilian Financial System (Sistema Financeiro Nacional – SFN) serves as the infrastructure enabling the circulation of money, credit, and payments throughout the country. It involves the Central Bank, banks, fintechs, credit cooperatives, payment institutions, and specialized technology providers, such as PSTIs. Through the SPB and the Instant Payments System (SPI), the SFN ensures fast, secure, and traceable settlement of fund transfers between institutions, thereby upholding trust and maintaining market functionality.

This cyberattack was facilitated through the compromise of C&M Software’s internal IT environment. A malicious insider—an employee of the PSTI—was recruited by a cybercriminal group and, in exchange for financial compensation, granted privileged access to internal systems, passwords, and sensitive institutional certificates. That access allowed attackers to manipulate the credentials and private keys of several C&M clients, primarily banks and fintechs, including BMP Money Plus. From there, attackers generated fraudulent transactions, signed in proper compliance with SPI’s cryptographic and procedural standards, allowing them to be instantly settled by the Central Bank. As these operations were technically valid, they were automatically debited from the reserve accounts of the victim institutions.

Because C&M Software acted as a core technical hub for hundreds of institutions, the breach had a wide-reaching and magnified impact. Not only did BMP Money Plus suffer substantial financial losses, but at least five other institutions were also compromised. The siphoned funds were immediately funneled through accounts held by mules, then quickly transferred to cryptoasset exchanges for conversion into Bitcoin and USDT, effectively complicating their traceability and recovery.

Due to its central role, C&M was at the center of the response efforts: alerted by affected institutions, C&M notified the Central Bank, implemented emergency containment measures, and had its operations within the SPB suspended until robust new controls could be enforced. The incident underscores how shortcomings in governance, privilege management, and certificate protection can result in systemic consequences. This analysis underscores the necessity of key security measures, including behavioral monitoring, automated credential management, just-in-time access control, and strict separation of client secrets to prevent similar events within such a highly interconnected financial environment like the SFN.

‍

1. Introduction

In a financial system built on trust and speed, a single insider can bring the entire network to a halt.
‍

Over the last two decades, Brazil has emerged as a global reference in financial innovation and infrastructure modernization. Its Financial System (SFN) stands out for its level of digital maturity, robust regulatory framework, and ability to integrate multiple market actors, fostering inclusion, efficiency, and large-scale security. One of the latest milestones in this evolution is the Instant Payment System (SPI), which, in tandem with PIX, has positioned Brazil ahead of many global markets in terms of speed and ubiquity of electronic fund transfers.
‍

PIX/SPI has become the financial backbone for transactions involving individuals, businesses, fintechs, and banks, processing billions of transfers with near-immediate settlement across accounts belonging to different institutions. This orchestration is made possible not just by the Central Bank but by a network of specialized providers—the Information Technology Services Providers (PSTIs)—who perform critical functions in clearing, settlement, and interconnection for traditional banks, credit unions, payment institutions, and digital platforms. The advent of open finance has further intensified reliance on these technical intermediaries, expanding both the number and diversity of participants and interfaces within Brazil’s digital financial ecosystem.
‍

However, this growth also brings new and complex challenges. As digitalization progresses and integrations multiply, so too do points of exposure to cyber threats, fraud, governance failures, and supply chain vulnerabilities. With operations distributed across many players—often with unequal security maturity—an isolated breach has the potential to jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and systemic availability of services that individuals and businesses rely on daily. Additionally, given the growing use of APIs, outsourced operations, and the sharing of institutional secrets, new attack surfaces are created for insiders, cybercriminals, and advanced persistent threat (APT) actors.
‍

The case examined in this article offers a stark exemplification of the risks and critical weak points in Brazil’s so-called “chain of trust.” By analyzing a real-life breach involving a central PSTI supporting banks and fintechs, we highlight the root causes, technical and institutional impacts, and practical recommendations to strengthen system resilience, privileged access management, and behavioral security controls within a complex and highly interconnected financial environment.
‍

‍

2. Understanding Brazil’s Financial System

The SFN operates via multiple interconnected components to ensure fast and secure interbank settlements. The Central Bank of Brazil (BACEN) serves as both the top regulator and operator of the Brazilian Payment System (SPB), which includes banks, payment institutions, technology providers (PSTIs), and cryptocurrency exchanges.
‍

Reserve Accounts

A cornerstone of the SPB is the reserve account, maintained by each financial institution with the Central Bank. These accounts power SPI (Instant Payment System), enabling irreversible, real-time transaction settlements via PIX.
‍

Banking-as-a-Service (BaaS)

BaaS platforms like BMP Money Plus enable fintechs, funds, and digital platforms to leverage full banking infrastructure, maintain reserve accounts, and facilitate payments through the SPB.
‍

Role of Exchanges

Cryptocurrency exchanges such as SmartPay and Truther bridge traditional finance and the crypto world, playing an essential role in transaction traceability and regulatory compliance at scale.

‍

3. Incident Description

At 4:00 a.m. on June 30, 2025, a senior executive at BMP Money Plus—a fintech specializing in banking-as-a-service (BaaS) solutions—received an unexpected call from CorpX Bank, alerting him to an unauthorized transfer of R$18 million from BMP’s reserve account. As the person responsible for managing those reserves with the Central Bank, the executive quickly identified that other similarly unauthorized PIX transactions were actively underway at that moment. BMP’s internal team immediately launched containment efforts and, by around 5:00 a.m., officially reported the incident to C&M Software, their critical payment processing service provider.
‍

Initial investigations and information published in the media indicated that the attack originated from an internal compromise at C&M Software—one of the leading PSTIs in Brazil’s Payment System (SPB). An internal facilitator, allegedly motivated by financial gain, provided privileged credentials to cybercriminals and assisted in executing malicious commands within company systems. Possessing privileged access and the digital certificates of C&M’s financial institution clients—including BMP itself and at least five other institutions—the attackers were able to inject fraudulent PIX orders directly into the SPI/SPB infrastructure. Because the transactions were digitally signed using valid institutional certificates, the Central Bank’s core systems processed them as legitimate, immediately debiting funds from the reserve accounts of the victim institutions.
‍

It is estimated that approximately R$400 million was siphoned from BMP’s reserve account alone, with R$160 million later successfully recovered. Following the breach, stolen funds were swiftly transferred to accounts held by third parties at smaller banks and payment institutions, particularly cryptoasset platforms integrated with PIX, including exchanges, gateways, and swap platforms. Most of the stolen funds were quickly converted into USDT or Bitcoin, further complicating traceability. However, in at least one case, an exchange that detected a high volume of suspicious activity froze the settlement and immediately notified BMP, thereby preventing the dispersion of a portion of the stolen funds.
‍

Given the magnitude of the attack and in order to prevent further losses, the Central Bank ordered an emergency suspension of C&M Software’s systems from the SPB—affecting PIX operations across more than 300 financial institutions that relied on its services. Despite the substantial financial damage, BMP Money Plus publicly emphasized that no end-customer funds were affected and that institutional guarantees fully covered the stolen amounts. Meanwhile, the Federal Police, activated by the Central Bank, opened a formal investigation to examine potential crimes such as criminal conspiracy, fraud-related theft, unauthorized system intrusion, and money laundering. The case remains under active investigation.

4. Incident Timeline

Below is the timeline of key events related to the incident—from initial compromise to response—based on information available at the time.

• June 30, 2025 – 12:18 AM: Exchanges such as SmartPay and Truther detect unusually high transaction volumes in Bitcoin/USDT and alert executives at financial institutions.
• June 30, 2025 – 4:00 AM: A BMP Money Plus executive is informed of an unusual PIX transfer totaling R$18 million; multiple unauthorized transactions are identified.
• June 30, 2025 – 5:00 AM: BMP executives report the incident to C&M Software.
• June 30, 2025: The Central Bank orders the emergency disconnection of C&M Software from the SPB.
• July 1, 2025: News portal Brazil Journal publishes an in-depth report on the cyberattack.
• July 2, 2025: BMP Money Plus issues an official statement acknowledging the breach.
• July 3, 2025: The Central Bank announces the partial restoration of C&M Software’s operations and confirms the arrest of an employee involved in the incident.
• July 4, 2025: Authorities confirm the detention of a staff member suspected of aiding the cybercriminal operation.

5. Technical Analysis of the Incident

The incident that unfolded between June 29 and July 4, 2025, may represent one of the largest systemic frauds ever recorded within Brazil’s Payment System (SPB), involving a wide range of actors—from external cybercriminals and internal insiders to financial institutions, technology service providers, and regulatory authorities. Below is a technical, chronological breakdown of the attack’s modus operandi, the mechanisms exploited, the money flow, and institutional responses.

‍

1. Initial Compromise: Insider Threat and Privilege Escalation

The first step in the incident was an internal compromise at C&M Software, an authorized and mission-critical Information Technology Services Provider (PSTI) within Brazil’s financial ecosystem. According to official investigations and media reports, an employee at C&M—referred to here as the “Facilitator”—was recruited by a cybercriminal group. Motivated by financial incentives, the insider shared administrative credentials and, following external instructions, executed strategic commands that enabled the attackers to operate undetected within the company’s internal environment.
‍

This privileged access was essential. It allowed the attackers to discover and retrieve cryptographic keys and digital certificates belonging to C&M’s client institutions, enabling the group to digitally impersonate those financial institutions. In many financial environments, inadequate segregation of secrets management (keys, certificates, and credentials) between clients and tech providers makes these attacks exponentially more dangerous.

‍

2. Injection of Fraudulent Orders and Automated Settlement

Once in possession of the original digital credentials and certificates belonging to compromised institutions—particularly BMP Money Plus and at least five others—the attackers began fabricating and injecting PIX payment orders directly into SPI (Instant Payment System) and SPB. Since the digital signatures were valid and the requests followed standard cryptographic formats, the Central Bank’s settlement infrastructure processed and executed them as legitimate. The SPI system, by design, presumes the authenticity of requests from verified participants.
‍

During the night of June 29 to June 30, these operations were carried out in bulk, automated fashion, outside of business hours—when manual oversight tends to be minimal. The reserve accounts of the victim institutions—held with the Central Bank for interbank operations—were systematically debited without triggering any SPI anomalies.

‍

3. Rapid Dispersion and Chain Effect

The next step involved the immediate dispersion of stolen funds. Large amounts—often sent in batches—were moved to “mule accounts” and smaller payment institutions (PIs), many of which featured less stringent KYC, onboarding, and compliance protocols. Funds were then transferred to cryptoasset service providers such as exchanges, OTC platforms, and swap apps. There, they were converted into Bitcoin and USDT and moved to wallets held by the attackers—often split into many small transactions to evade tracing.
‍

This sequence underscores the attackers’ operational sophistication:

• Exploiting supply chain links between the PSTI (C&M) and multiple banks/fintechs;
• Leveraging scripts and automation to submit dozens of transactions in succession;
• Executing the fraud during off-peak operational hours.

‍

4. Timeline of Actions, Detection, and Response

🕛 June 30, 2025 – 12:18 AM: Initial Detection by Exchanges
SmartPay and Truther exchanges were the first to detect suspicious activity. Their monitoring systems flagged abnormal transaction volumes and unusual purchases of Bitcoin/USDT made via PIX, triggering alerts to internal compliance teams and associated financial institutions.
‍

🕓 June 30, 2025 – 4:00 AM: BMP Executives Flag the Incident
Prompted by exchange alerts and transaction analysis, a BMP Money Plus executive was contacted by a CorpX Bank representative regarding an extraordinary PIX transfer of R$18 million originating from BMP. This kicked off an internal audit that revealed several unauthorized SPI transactions debiting BMP’s reserve account.
‍

🕔 June 30, 2025 – 5:00 AM: Incident Escalation
BMP formally notified C&M Software, reporting the breach and requesting urgent assistance from the provider responsible for part of the institution’s interbank infrastructure. By this point, the breadth of the attack suggested a systemic compromise affecting multiple C&M clients.
‍

⚠️ June 30, 2025: Regulatory Response — Central Bank Intervention
With converging reports from exchanges, BMP, and other affected financial institutions, the Central Bank was officially notified of a potential systemic breach. As an emergency measure, it ordered the precautionary suspension of C&M Software’s connections to SPB—halting PIX operations across all institutions that interfaced through its platform. This action aimed to prevent further fraud and maintain system liquidity, despite triggering operational interruptions for hundreds of banks, fintechs, and payment entities.
‍

📰 From July 1, 2025 Onward: Public Disclosure, Analysis, and Partial Recovery
In the days that followed, national media widely covered the breach, and official statements from BMP, C&M Software, and the Central Bank confirmed that no end-user funds had been affected. BMP reported that, of the R$400 million initially stolen, approximately R$160 million had been recovered through rapid collaboration with crypto exchanges, court orders, and financial tracing efforts.
‍

Later, the Central Bank authorized the partial reactivation of C&M’s services—only after new control mechanisms and stricter access segregation were implemented. Amid the ongoing investigation, authorities confirmed the identification and arrest of the “facilitator”, the insider who enabled the breach. The Federal Police continues to investigate charges related to unauthorized access, banking fraud, and money laundering.

‍

5. Operational Roles Across the Attack Chain

• Cybercriminals: Strategized and executed the attack, exploiting both human and technical vulnerabilities. Used automation to scale operations and reduce execution time.
• Insider (Facilitator): Served as the human vulnerability, granting “legitimate” access to core systems. Illustrates the danger of excessive privilege and lack of behavioral monitoring.
• C&M Software (PSTI): Due to the absence of strong access segregation and behavioral controls, acted as the point of compromise that exposed its entire client base.
• Victim FIs: Banks and fintechs whose reserve accounts were debited, suffering direct financial loss and reputational impact.
• SPI/SPB: The infrastructure processed all digitally signed payment orders as expected—highlighting the limitations of automated controls against insider-originated attacks.
• Mule Accounts / Payment Institutions (PIs): Weak onboarding and due diligence processes made them attractive channels for laundering and dispersing stolen funds.
• Exchanges: A key positive aspect—proactive exchange-based compliance systems successfully detected, contained, and reported portions of the fraud, helping reduce total impact.

Below, you’ll find a step-by-step visualization of the incident flow:

6. MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

The attack on C&M Software’s environment demonstrates a well-defined chain of techniques documented in the MITRE ATT&CK Framework (Enterprise v17). Mapping these techniques supports threat hunting, incident response, and the enhancement of internal security controls across financial institutions and PSTI providers.
‍

Below, we highlight the main tactics and techniques involved, referencing specific examples from the 2025 incident.

7. APT Groups: Exploratory Assessment

It is important to highlight that, as of now, none of the groups listed below have any confirmed connection to the attack under investigation. These references are intended primarily to inform threat intelligence efforts and assist in shaping strategic defense planning.
‍

Although there has been no formal attribution to any internationally recognized Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) groups, the technical analysis of the attack on C&M Software reveals multiple operational similarities with campaigns previously carried out by sophisticated threat actors. These actors vary in motivation, technical breadth, and focus—often targeting critical financial infrastructures.
‍

The purpose of this mapping is to help place the Brazilian incident within the context of global cyber threat trends, supporting the early identification of attack patterns and contributing to more proactive and intelligence-driven defense strategies.

The groups outlined below demonstrate common Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) seen in supply chain compromises, banking intrusions, ransomware campaigns, and money-laundering-driven data exfiltration:

‍

Notable Examples

• Plump Spider – Known for leveraging the Clop ransomware, this group has been involved in systemic attacks on global financial institutions. Its operations often combine supply chain compromise, large-scale data and confidential information exfiltration, and laundering of proceeds via cryptoasset mixer services.
• TA505 – Specializes in malspam-driven campaigns, frequent use of Cobalt Strike for post-exploitation, and targeted attacks on banks and fintechs. Notable for its ability to rapidly convert and disperse illicit funds.
• FIN7 / Carbanak – With an established reputation for social engineering and persistent access to banking environments, FIN7 is known for extended campaigns that leverage legitimate infrastructure and internal credentials to facilitate stealthy data exfiltration and fund diversion.
• LAPSUS$ – Gained notoriety for its highly visible and theatrical attacks on major enterprises, with a particular focus on social engineering, privileged access acquisition, and the public exposure of stolen data. While the group is not a direct fit for this incident, which centers on financial operations, some alignment remains in terms of initial access and insider exploitation tactics.

‍

8. Mitigation Strategies

Given the context and the vulnerabilities exposed by the incident, we propose a set of mitigation measures focused on behavioral security, automated credential management, and strong governance across the digital supply chain:

• Behavioral Analytics: Real-time detection of anomalous privileged access; automatic blocking based on deviation patterns, with correlation by geolocation, time of access, and other indicators.
• Just-in-Time Access: Grant privileged access strictly for specific tasks or timeframes, thereby reducing exposure windows to insider threats.
• Credential Rotation (triggered by anomalous behavior): Credentials are automatically refreshed or revoked upon detection of any suspicious activity.
• Secrets and Token Management for APIs and Supply Chain: Deployment of secure vaulting tools to safely isolate and manage third-party integrations and secrets.
• Certificate Management and Rotation: Continuous monitoring and automated renewal of digital certificates used in critical financial operations.
• Third-Party Access Control: Implementation of Zero Trust policies for partners, with strict onboarding and offboarding processes.

Reference Architecture: A recommended visual design illustrating an integrated security model for PSTIs, financial institutions, and the Central Bank (suggested as a flowchart or architecture diagram).

‍

9. Conclusion

The attack that impacted C&M Software and multiple institutions connected to Brazil’s Payment System (SPB) underscores the critical role of behavioral cybersecurity and credential control in safeguarding financial ecosystems. This event exposed significant weaknesses in privileged access management, particularly within trust relationships between financial institutions and their technology service providers. It clearly demonstrates that traditional paradigms—relying solely on logical perimeters, firewalls, and network segmentation—are insufficient to defend against insider threats, supply chain compromise, and sophisticated attacks enabled by the misuse of valid credentials and seemingly legitimate but unauthorized operations.
‍

The incident revealed that insider actions, improper certificate usage, and the absence of behavioral monitoring allowed fraudulent activity to flow through automated systems without triggering alarms across various points in the chain. Additionally, it reinforced the importance of traceability, real-time threat intelligence, and collaborative defense among key ecosystem players including fintechs, banks, exchanges, and regulatory bodies.
‍

From the lessons learned, the following mitigation strategies stand out:

• Continuous Behavioral Analytics: Monitor privileged user behavior in real time, generating alerts and automated blocks when anomalies are detected—such as unusual access times, organizational changes, or abnormal geolocation data.
• Just-in-Time Access & Least Privilege: Minimize the time during which sensitive credentials remain active. Grant access strictly for specific tasks and timeframes, with comprehensive logging and traceability.
• Credential Rotation Triggered by Anomalies: Implement mechanisms for the automatic replacement of passwords, tokens, and certificates whenever suspicious behavior is detected—preventing persistence or reuse of compromised access.
• Secure Management of Secrets, Tokens, and Digital Certificates: Centralize the lifecycle control, usage auditing, and periodic renewal of these assets—especially across integrations between financial institutions, PSTIs, and APIs—to mitigate leakage and misuse risks.
• Zero Trust Policies and Tight Third-Party Controls: Define robust procedures for granting, monitoring, and revoking access to partners, vendors, and external teams. Ensure consistent due diligence and oversight.
  ‍

Ultimately, the case highlights that operational resilience, rapid intelligence sharing, transparent communication, and the integration of technical and procedural controls are foundational pillars for the systemic defense of the national financial environment in the face of evolving and sophisticated threats.

Speak to Our Experts
To learn how Segura® can support your organization in behavioral cybersecurity, privileged access management, and fraud-resistant architecture, contact us for a personalized strategic assessment.

 

Learn how AI-powered, real-time session monitoring helps stop insider threats and privileged attacks before they escalate.

‍

In this guide, you’ll learn:

• Why legacy session monitoring isn’t enough
• How advanced Privileged Session Management (PSM) works in real time
• What to look for in modern PSM tools
• How AI-driven session analysis reduces risk
• Where advanced PSM delivers the most value

‍

Picture this: It’s 3:12 a.m., and a compromised payroll admin’s account just got used in Kyiv…a location this employee has never visited. The attacker breezed past outdated MFA, having obtained the one-time code during a phishing attempt last week. Sensitive salary data vanishes, new direct-deposit details queue up, and it’s all discovered 194 days later (the average time it takes to detect a breach, according to IBM), long after unapproved payouts drain your budget. 

‍

Incidents like this aren’t edge cases; they’ve become the norm. Credential-based attacks jumped 71 percent in 2024, and 44 percent of employees still reuse passwords across personal and corporate accounts. Static defenses can’t keep up. They treat every login exactly the same, no matter where, when, or how it happens, leaving you with a painful dilemma: add more friction (and watch support tickets spike) or accept higher risk.

Risk-Based Authentication (RBA) ends that trade-off. Instead of forcing blanket MFA policies, RBA evaluates each login in real time and tailors the challenge to the actual threat level. Legitimate users pass through while suspicious logins face step-up verification or are blocked outright. 

In this article, we’ll break down everything you need to launch Risk-Based Authentication with confidence. 

‍

What is Risk-Based Authentication (RBA)?

Risk-Based Authentication (RBA) is a smarter way to verify user logins. Instead of handling every single sign-in with identical security challenges, an RBA engine decides on the fly whether you’re likely to be who you claim. 

‍

Many organizations already collect similar contextual telemetry inside identity or privileged-access tools. For instance, Segura’s PAM platform records device posture and session metadata every time an admin checks out a credential. RBA simply brings that context to the forefront of the login decision.

‍

Sometimes you’ll see RBA called “adaptive authentication,” but the principle remains the same: weigh each login’s context and act accordingly. Although RBA mainly focuses on the time of sign-in, many solutions keep watch for suspicious mid-session changes, tagging potential anomalies before they lead to a breach.

‍

How does Risk-Based Authentication work?

RBA works by assessing real-time contextual data and scoring how likely it is that a login attempt is genuine. Then it responds based on that risk. 

‍

The process involves multiple stages:

‍

Contextual data collection

As soon as a user enters their primary credentials, the system starts gathering contextual information. Here are a few factors that might get collected. 

Risk scoring

Those signals go into a smart engine, often powered by machine learning, which then figures out whether the login attempt is risky. Low scores mean “business as usual,” while high scores indicate red alerts that can get blocked or challenged.

‍

Adaptive response

Depending on the score, the RBA system decides how to react.

• Low risk: Primary credentials are accepted, and the user proceeds with minimal friction.
• Medium risk: RBA prompts a one-time code or another step-up challenge. 
• High risk: Access is rejected or needs stringent verification before proceeding.  

Some advanced RBA deployments also watch how users behave during sessions. If the behavior suddenly becomes suspicious, the system might require the user to reauthenticate.

‍

Key benefits of implementing RBA

Implementing RBA is far more than an incremental security improvement. It strengthens your security posture while improving the login experience.

• Enhanced Security Against Account Compromise: By analyzing context in real time, RBA catches suspicious behavior that static defenses would miss, cutting down on phishing and brute-force break-ins. Many organizations report around 50% fewer identity-related breaches with RBA.
• Frictionless User Experience: The biggest advantage of RBA is it challenges people only when necessary. Instead of an MFA prompt for every single login, only 8 to 10% of sign-ins need step-up factors – helping reduce MFA fatigue.
• Operational Efficiency: This means cost savings in both support tickets and security responses. When RBA hooks into a PAM solution like Segura, privileged sessions inherit risk scores automatically, so help-desk staff spend less time managing emergency ‘break-glass’ access (emergency override access) and security teams can focus on actual threats.
• Compliance Support: RBA supports compliance with frameworks like GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI-DSS by demonstrating adaptive, risk-aware security. NIST’s digital identity guidelines explicitly call out RBA as a recommended approach.
• Secure Remote Work: RBA evaluates logins based on real-time context rather than static assumptions about device or location, making it ideal for hybrid work and BYOD environments.

‍

Strategic planning for RBA implementation

Deploying RBA requires careful planning and clear organizational alignment. Effective RBA implementations start with clearly defined objectives, thoughtful assessment of organizational readiness, and careful solution selection. 

‍

Here’s how to structure your strategy to ensure your RBA deployment is successful.

‍

Defining objectives, scope, and use cases

Begin by clearly articulating what you want to achieve with RBA. Specific objectives might include reducing account takeover incidents, improving login experience, protecting high-value applications, or meeting compliance requirements. 

Define measurable goals like “Reduce fraudulent account access by 80%” or “Maintain step-up challenges under 5% of logins.”

Next, determine implementation scope. Will RBA be rolled out for workforce logins, customer applications, or both? Which authentication flows should incorporate risk evaluation? Prioritize areas of highest risk or value, such as privileged accounts and remote access portals. For each use case, define authentication policies in business terms, creating scenario-based requirements that will later translate to technical rules.

Assessing organizational readiness

Is your organization ready for RBA? Evaluate based on the following factors: 

Data readiness: RBA requires contextual data points like device information, geolocation, and login history. Assess whether your infrastructure captures these signals and maintains sufficient historical data to establish baselines.

Technical infrastructure: Review your authentication architecture, including identity providers, VPN solutions, and application authentication flows. Many modern IAM platforms have built-in RBA capabilities or APIs for integration. Determine whether you’ll leverage existing features or need to integrate third-party solutions.

Organizational readiness: Consider the human factor. Do you have the expertise to manage an RBA system? Ensure stakeholder buy-in from leadership, security operations, and IT support teams who will handle alerts and support cases related to RBA.

Choosing the right RBA solution

No single RBA tool fits all use cases. Some organizations might just flip on RBA in their existing IAM suite, while others may need a standalone engine for advanced correlation and machine learning capabilities.  

‍

Here are some factors that can help you decide what’s the right fit for your organization: 

‍

Integration capabilities

Will this plug easily into your current identity provider? If you already run Segura for privileged access, see whether your RBA engine can consume its session telemetry via API. 

‍

Risk model sophistication

Do you want a rule-based approach that you can manually tweak, or do you prefer a black-box ML system that “just works”? 

‍

Policy flexibility

Make sure you can craft specific rules for different user groups. 

‍

User experience

Which MFA forms do you want to offer? Push notifications, tokens, biometrics, or FIDO2 keys?  

‍

Scalability and performance

Check that your RBA solution can handle peak workloads without slowing user logins.

‍

Step-by-step implementation guide

Think of RBA as a strategic shift rather than just another tacked-on security feature. It can genuinely improve your security posture…but only if you plan carefully and feed it good data.

Phase 1: Data collection & integration

Imagine your authentication system as a doorkeeper who needs to quickly evaluate each visitor. Without proper information, even the most vigilant guard makes poor decisions. 

Your first mission is to give your system the right signals to interpret.

Integrate RBA into authentication flow:  If your existing IAM supports conditional access or risk evaluation, enable those. Otherwise, configure APIs to call a standalone RBA engine at login.  

Set up data feeds: Ensure the system receives all relevant context signals. Connect to directories for user attributes, device management solutions for device health, and threat intelligence feeds if applicable. For browser-based logins, implement JavaScript for device fingerprinting. Configure any additional integrations needed for geolocation or IP reputation services.

Don’t forget privileged credentials: Integrating Segura’s audit stream with the RBA engine allows you to flag logins that immediately pivot to high-risk commands.

Establish baseline monitoring: Run the RBA engine in a quiet mode for a week or two, gathering risk scores without enforcing them. This helps you see normal versus abnormal behavior before you start challenging users.  

Configure high availability: Decide if you fail-open (grant login if the RBA service is down) or fail-closed (block everyone if risk checks fail). Each option has trade-offs between user impact and security.

‍

Phase 2: Policy definition & configuration

Now it’s time to determine how your system interprets the signals it receives. This isn’t merely about technical configuration. It’s about encoding your organization’s security philosophy into actionable rules.

Define risk scoring rules: Configure how the system should assess risk factors based on your baseline data and organizational priorities. 

For example, you might set rules like “IP address from new country AND new device adds +30 risk” or “Executive group logins from outside headquarters are at least medium risk.” 

Review default weightings and adjust to fit your environment, perhaps lowering geolocation significance for users who travel frequently.

Set risk thresholds: Decide how to categorize low, medium, and high risk. If you set the bar too high, everyone gets challenged. If you set it too low, you may allow suspicious logins. 

Configure adaptive responses: Map each risk level to specific actions. 

Typically, you’d: 

• Allow low-risk logins with primary credentials only. 
• Require step-up authentication for medium risk.
• Block or impose stringent verification for high risk. 

Set up the step-up mechanisms, whether push notifications, OTP codes, or biometric verification.

Handle special cases: Implement exception rules for specific scenarios, perhaps all privileged account logins require MFA regardless of risk, or certain service accounts need alternative approaches. 

Configure handling for new users with no historical baseline, and establish procedures for planned exceptions like business travel.

Define user messaging: Present clear messages like “We need additional verification” rather than cryptic error codes. Transparent comms help users understand increased security steps.

‍

Phase 3: User behavior modeling & tuning

Security systems protect humans, but are often defeated by human behavior. This phase is where your RBA implementation learns to distinguish between unusual but legitimate access and actual threats.

Conduct pilot rollout: Before you deploy RBA across the organization, enable full RBA (with challenges) for a controlled group, perhaps the IT department or a volunteer pilot team. 

This limited scope allows you to observe how the system performs with real users while minimizing potential disruption. Pay close attention to how many logins trigger MFA, how well users understand the prompts, and whether any genuine security events are detected.

Refine user behavior models: If your solution uses machine learning, allow time for the system to learn normal patterns for each user. 

During this period, encourage pilot users to follow their typical login routines so the system can establish accurate baselines. As normal behavior is modeled, risk scores for routine logins should decrease.

Tune based on feedback: Analyze both quantitative data and qualitative feedback to refine your configuration. If legitimate logins frequently trigger medium-risk responses, investigate why; perhaps certain factors need adjustment. 

For example, if developers regularly use different machines, device novelty shouldn’t be heavily penalized for that group. Conversely, if suspicious attempts aren’t properly flagged, strengthen relevant factors.

Address false positives/negatives: Examine any security incidents that RBA should have detected but didn’t, and incorporate those lessons into your model. Similarly, identify and address patterns causing unnecessary challenges for specific user groups.

Document and communicate: Keep an internal knowledge base with current risk rules and known behaviors. Prepare communication material explaining the new authentication approach and set appropriate expectations before broader rollout.

‍

Phase 4: Testing, rollout & monitoring

With a refined configuration and lessons from your pilot internalized, you’re ready to expand protection across your organization. 

‍

Implement phased rollout: Using insights from the pilot, gradually expand RBA enforcement, perhaps department by department or application by application. Monitor each expansion phase for unexpected issues before proceeding to the next group. 

Conduct comprehensive testing: Before fully enabling RBA for critical services, test various scenarios: normal logins, clearly risky attempts, and edge cases. Verify that step-up prompts work correctly across all platforms, test failure cases and recovery procedures, and validate administrative functions like override capabilities and logging.

Establish monitoring and alerting: Create dashboards tracking key metrics: authentication volumes, risk distributions, challenge rates, and block events. Configure alerts for potential attack patterns (multiple high-risk attempts at one account) or system issues (sudden changes in risk distribution). Integrate RBA logs with your SIEM for correlation with other security events.

Develop incident procedures: Create clear protocols for handling RBA-related events. Define how support staff should verify identity when legitimate users are blocked, and establish security team responses when suspicious access attempts are detected. Incorporate RBA signals into your broader security incident response workflow.

Implement continuous improvement: Schedule regular reviews of RBA performance, using metrics to identify opportunities for refinement. As business conditions evolve (work patterns change, new threats emerge), adjust policies accordingly. When expanding to new applications or user groups, repeat the tuning process for those contexts.

‍

RBA implementation best practices

A successful RBA rollout doesn’t end with deployment. It requires ongoing refinement and proactive management to remain effective against evolving threats. 

‍

Below are some best practices drawn from organizations that have successfully embedded RBA into their security DNA.

Establish clear metrics: Define and track KPIs for both security (prevented breaches, blocked suspicious attempts) and user experience (challenge rates, login success). Set target ranges to guide ongoing tuning.

Feed rich data sources: You’ll get better detection if you keep feeding your RBA engine updated intelligence about user roles, device posture, and potential threat sources.  

Continuously tune the system: RBA is not “set-and-forget” security. Regularly review performance metrics and adjust policies as threat landscapes and business conditions evolve. Simulate attack scenarios to verify effectiveness, and incorporate feedback from security incidents to strengthen detection capabilities.

Layer with other controls: Complement RBA with a broader security mesh, like mandatory MFA for admin accounts or integration with Zero Trust. RBA signals can feed a Zero Trust model, stepping up scrutiny whenever something looks off.  

Ensure transparency: Let employees know they may see extra prompts if their login behavior changes, to keep them from feeling blindsided. Establish straightforward support processes for when legitimate users encounter difficulties.

Handle exceptions gracefully: Create procedures for special situations like business travel or temporary device changes. Implement time-bound exceptions with appropriate approvals rather than permanent bypasses. Document all exceptions and review them periodically to prevent security gaps.

Protect privacy: Don’t forget compliance around data minimization and retention. Device and location logs can be sensitive, so enforce suitable retention schedules and encryption.

‍

How to integrate RBA into your security ecosystem

Risk-Based Authentication isn’t a standalone solution. It thrives when fully integrated into your broader security ecosystem. 

‍

For example, Segura’s just-in-time session brokering can pass a ‘privileged-session’ flag to your RBA policy, automatically raising the risk floor before the admin even reaches the vault.

Identity and Access Management (IAM): Implement RBA at the IAM level so all federated applications benefit from contextual risk assessment. When using Single Sign-On, enable RBA in the SSO flow to provide consistent protection across connected applications. Exchange identity information bidirectionally, user status changes from IAM should influence RBA policies, while RBA risk signals can trigger IAM actions like forced password resets.

Zero Trust Architecture: Position RBA as a key component of Zero Trust by providing continuous, context-aware identity verification. Integrate with ZTNA (Zero Trust Network Access) solutions to combine device posture and identity risk into unified access decisions. Configure RBA to re-evaluate sessions periodically, aligning with the “never trust, always verify” principle by challenging users when context changes significantly during active sessions.

Privileged Access Management (PAM): Apply enhanced RBA scrutiny to privileged operations. When administrators access sensitive systems or retrieve credentials from vaults, contextual risk assessment can identify unusual access patterns that might indicate compromise. Configure stricter thresholds for admin accounts, potentially requiring additional verification or approval for high-risk privileged sessions.

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) and SOAR: Feed RBA events to your SIEM for correlation with other security signals. Configure alerts when multiple high-risk login attempts occur across different accounts from the same source, potentially indicating coordinated attacks. Integrate with SOAR platforms to automate responses, for example, triggering account lockouts or security team notifications when suspicious patterns emerge. Create bidirectional integration where SIEM/UEBA insights about unusual user behavior can influence risk scores for subsequent authentication attempts.

Customer Identity and Fraud Systems: For consumer-facing applications, integrate RBA with fraud detection platforms to create a unified risk view. Combine authentication context with transaction patterns so suspicious account behavior (like unusual purchases or profile changes) can trigger step-up challenges before sensitive operations complete.

‍

The future of Risk-Based Authentication

RBA’s going to keep evolving as AI tools get smarter and more embedded in authentication systems. With machine learning becoming sharper at picking out unusual activity, we’ll likely see fewer false alarms interrupting legitimate users. Take behavioral biometrics, for instance, tracking nuanced user habits like typing speed or subtle mouse gestures could soon quietly double-check identities behind the scenes throughout a user’s session.

‍

One shift worth keeping track of is real-time threat intelligence sharing, where organizations swap security signals in the moment. Think of it like a neighborhood watch – when compromised passwords turn up in leaked databases or suspicious activity is spotted elsewhere, organizations can immediately tighten their own authentication policies in response. It’s a bit like how banks quickly alert each other to prevent fraud when someone tries using a stolen credit card.

‍

We’re probably heading into an era where the clear-cut distinction between that initial login check and continuous security monitoring starts to fade. Instead of just validating a user once at sign-in, risk assessment will likely follow the user during their entire interaction, adjusting the trust level based on device data, sensor inputs, and session behavior. So, rather than giving users a free pass post-login, organizations will continuously re-confirm their identity, making security more fluid and dynamic.

‍

Ultimately, expect systems themselves to become more dynamic, adjusting authentication factors on the fly depending on the exact context and risk profile of each transaction. Imagine you’re logging in from a coffee shop’s Wi-Fi for the first time. In a situation like this, RBA might prompt additional verification automatically, even if you’re using a familiar security key or fingerprint.

‍

Don’t wait for a breach – take action today

Risk-Based Authentication represents a fundamental shift from static checkpoints to intelligent, adaptive security. By adopting RBA, your organization can significantly reduce the risk of credential-based threats, streamline user experience, and eliminate the outdated trade-off between security and usability.

But effective RBA doesn’t happen by accident – it requires the right tools and a trusted partner. Segura simplifies this transition with robust, ready-to-implement features like real-time session monitoring, contextual policy controls, and Continuous Identification: a built-in capability that dynamically validates user identity throughout the session. These features integrate seamlessly with your existing systems to deliver stronger security without added friction.
‍