Access isn’t authority: the hidden risks of over-permissioning

Why giving too much access to too many people might be the biggest vulnerability you’re not tracking.

In the world of security, there’s a dangerous assumption that often goes unnoticed until something goes wrong:

If someone has access, they must need it.

This simple assumption lies at the heart of one of the most overlooked risks in both physical and digital environments: over-permissioning."

From warehouses to server rooms, payroll systems to cloud platforms, it’s incredibly common to find individuals with more access than their roles truly require. And while it might seem harmless on the surface “it’s just easier that way” the consequences of excessive access can be severe, costly, and often entirely avoidable.

What is Over-Permissioning?

Over-permissioning occurs when individuals are granted access, either physical or digital, to assets, information, or areas that fall outside the scope of their job function.

This might look like:

A former contractor still having VPN access months after leaving.

A junior staff member with admin privileges to critical systems.

A receptionist able to enter a secure records room.

A delivery driver being granted access to an entire floor "for convenience."

Often, it’s the result of well-intentioned shortcuts:

“It’ll save time.”

“They might need it later.”

“We’ll fix it eventually.”

Except eventually often comes too late.

How Over-Permissioning Compromises Security

1. Expands the Attack Surface

Every unnecessary access point is a potential gateway for internal misuse or external exploitation. If a single compromised account can navigate far beyond its intended scope, the damage scales quickly.

2. Blurs Accountability

When too many people can access too many things, it becomes harder to trace who did what, and when. Investigations become murky, and incidents become harder to contain or understand.

3. Increases Insider Risk

Not all insider threats are malicious. Many arise from unintentional misuse, clicking the wrong link, deleting the wrong file, or accessing data they don’t realise is sensitive. Over-permissioning amplifies the fallout of honest mistakes.

4. Undermines Compliance & Governance

Most regulatory frameworks require the principle of least privilege, that individuals should only have access necessary for their job. Over-permissioning often violates this and can result in failed audits, fines, or reputational harm.

Why It Happens So Often

Over-permissioning is rarely deliberate. It’s often the product of:

Onboarding shortcuts (“Just copy permissions from the last person”)

Fear of disrupting work (“Let’s not restrict them, they might need it”)

Poor offboarding (“We’ll remove access next week…”)

Lack of visibility (“We didn’t know they still had access”)

Convenience over control (“It’s just easier this way”)

In fast-moving or understaffed environments, it’s easy to grant access "just in case," but far harder to monitor and manage it effectively once that door has been opened.

How to Reduce Over-Permissioning in Your Organisation

It doesn’t take an overhaul, just a shift in mindset and process.

Apply Least Privilege by Default

Start from the minimum. Give people access to only what they need "right now." Additional permissions should be temporary, time-bound, and documented.

Conduct Access Reviews Regularly

Schedule quarterly (or even monthly) reviews of who has access to what, especially during role changes, team restructuring, or after major projects end.

Automate Offboarding Protocols

The moment someone exits, whether a contractor, employee, or third party, access should be automatically and immediately revoked across systems and locations.

Log, Monitor, and Trace

Maintain clear logs of access approvals, changes, and usage. This isn’t just about compliance, it’s about being able to spot irregularities *before* they become incidents.

Train Teams to Value Access as a Risk

Don’t just focus on what tools people need, teach them why too much access can be a threat. A culture of awareness starts with understanding.

Final Thought: Convenience vs Consequence

Access should never be granted because it’s easier in the moment.

Because when things go wrong, and eventually, they will, it’s not convenience that gets questioned. It’s the consequences.

The right people, with the right access, at the right time. That’s the standard.

Everything else is risk.