English 
AI identity security is basically the practice of securing and governing identities, credential s, permissions, and access rights that get used by people, machines, applications, and even autonomous AI systems.
The cybersecurity perimeter has quietly changed, you know. It is no longer just about guarding the network, the devices, or the applications sitting inside it. The bigger worry now is more like ‘who or what can reach them,’ ‘what can that identity actually do,’ and ‘if that access still makes sense’ not just technically, but in a real, practical way.
The urgency is hard to ignore. The World Economic Forum reports that 87% of respondents identified AI-related vulnerabilities as the fastest-growing cyber risk over the course of 2025.
こちらもお読みください： 日本における先進的な半導体パッケージング：3Dチップ集積が次の競争優位性となる理由
This article looks at how AI identity security is evolving across human users, machine identities, and autonomous AI agents, and what enterprises need to change before identity sprawl becomes an even bigger security problem.
The Expanding Perimeter and Why AI Changes the Identity Landscape
Traditional IAM was built around a fairly simple assumption. People use applications, applications sit behind a network, and security teams control who gets through the door.
Cloud computing weakened that model. Remote work weakened it further. AI is now changing it at a much deeper level.
The modern enterprise may have employees, contractors, applications, APIs, service accounts, workloads, bots, copilots, and autonomous agents accessing the same environment. Each one can carry credentials, permissions, tokens, or delegated authority. That is identity sprawl.
The problem is not simply that there are more identities. The problem is that many of them can operate without direct human involvement. A forgotten service account can continue accessing a system. An API token can remain active long after its original purpose disappears. An AI agent can potentially take action based on permissions that nobody reviews closely enough.
That changes the security equation.
The perimeter is increasingly becoming the identity itself. Protecting the network still matters, but identity determines what happens after access is granted.
AI identity security therefore has to answer more than one question. It must establish who or what is requesting access, what that identity is allowed to do, why it needs that access, and whether the action remains trustworthy over time.
The Triad of Modern Enterprise Identities
Modern enterprises now have to secure three connected identity categories. Humans remain the most targeted. Machines create a vast hidden layer of credentials and permissions. Autonomous AI agents introduce something even more difficult, identities that can reason, act, and delegate access with limited human involvement.
1. Securing Human Identities in the Age of AI Phishing
Humans remain the easiest identity layer to manipulate because attackers do not always need to defeat security technology. Sometimes they only need to convince the person sitting behind it.
AI makes that manipulation cheaper and more convincing. マイクロソフト points to the growing use of AI for scaled phishing, impersonation, password attacks, and manipulation of agents. Attackers can create more believable messages and impersonation attempts while reducing the effort required to target large numbers of users.
That puts traditional authentication habits under pressure.
MFA fatigue is a good example. If a user receives repeated authentication prompts, the goal may be to make them approve one simply to make the notifications stop. Deepfakes and AI-generated voice can add another layer by making impersonation feel more credible.
The answer is not to blame users for every failed login. Enterprises need stronger controls around them.
Phishing-resistant credentials can reduce the value of stolen passwords and fake login pages. Biometric authentication can make moving account access around more of a pain, like when you try to transfer it between people. At the same time, behavior based access controls can look at what’s going on in context, instead of just assuming every successful login is trustworthy, no questions asked.
So if a login comes from some unusual location, an unknown device, or a different pattern, it should not automatically get the same level of access as a familiar one.
That is the shift AI identity security needs to make. Authentication should become a continuous assessment of trust rather than a single checkpoint at the beginning of a session.
2. Managing Machine Identities Through APIs, Secrets, and Tokens
Human identities are visible. Machine identities are often not.
Applications, APIs, cloud workloads, service accounts, certificates, tokens, and secrets can all act as identities inside an enterprise. They may never appear in an employee directory, yet they can still have access to sensitive systems.
That creates a difficult governance problem. An organization may know exactly when an employee joins or leaves. It may have far less visibility into when an API key should expire, when a service account should be removed, or whether a certificate is still needed.
The risk becomes even more important when machines start acting on behalf of humans.
AWS argues that agents require their own identities, secure credential storage, and least-privilege authorization. Its AgentCore Identity approach provides machine identities while maintaining traceable delegation, allowing organizations to connect an agent’s actions back to the authority behind them.
That principle matters beyond AI agents.
Every machine identity needs an owner, a defined purpose, limited permissions, and a lifecycle. Otherwise, credentials accumulate quietly. Some become orphaned. Others retain access simply because removing them feels risky.
This is where automated identity governance becomes essential. Enterprises cannot realistically manage every API key, token, certificate, and workload identity through manual reviews.
AI identity security therefore has to cover the identities that people rarely see. If security teams only monitor human accounts, they are protecting the visible layer while leaving the machinery underneath largely exposed.
3. Governing Autonomous AI Agents and Workflows
AI agents change the identity problem again because they do not simply access information. They can act on it.
A conventional application may retrieve a record when instructed. An autonomous agent could read the record, interpret it, call another tool, send an email, update a system, or change code as part of a larger workflow.
That makes permission design far more important.
An agent should not get very broad access just because the human who created it has broad access already. The agent really needs its own identity, its own permissions, and clear limits on what it can actually do, not a free pass.
Google Cloud’s 2026 identity approach shows this change in a more obvious way, through Agent Identity, scoped human delegation, and Agent Gateway controls across user-to-agent, agent-to-agent, and agent-to-tool interactions.
The principle is straightforward. Every action needs context.
Who initiated it? Which agent performed it? What tool did it use? What information did it access? Was the action within the agent’s intended scope?
Least privilege becomes particularly important here. An agent that can send emails does not automatically need permission to modify financial records. An agent that can review code does not necessarily need permission to deploy it.
Guardrails should therefore exist before the agent reaches a sensitive system. Continuous monitoring should then check what happens after access is granted.
This is where AI identity security moves beyond traditional IAM. The goal is no longer just to authenticate an entity. It is to govern an entity that can make decisions and take actions.
Best Practices for Building an AI-Resilient Identity Framework
The technology may be new, but the underlying discipline is familiar. Enterprises still need strong authentication, controlled access, governance, and continuous monitoring. The difference is that those controls now have to work across humans, machines, and AI agents.
マッキンゼー estimates that agentic AI security spending could reach 15% of enterprise cybersecurity budgets within three years, with identity, governance, and data among the major areas of focus.
That makes identity security a strategic investment rather than another technical checkbox.
Implement continuous Identity Threat Detection and Response. ITDR should look for suspicious identity behavior instead of waiting for a confirmed breach. The goal is to identify unusual access and respond before compromised credentials become a larger problem.
Enforce Zero Trust across every identity type. Zero Trust should not stop at employees. Machine identities and AI agents also need verification, limited access, and continuous evaluation.
Automate Identity Governance and Administration. Manual identity reviews become harder as identity sprawl grows. Automated provisioning, deprovisioning, credential rotation, and permission reviews can reduce the number of forgotten identities.
Audit service accounts and API keys regularly. Every credential should have an owner, purpose, scope, and expiration path. Anything that cannot meet those conditions should be questioned.
Apply least privilege to AIエージェント. An agent should receive only the access required for its specific task. Broad permissions create broad consequences when an agent behaves unexpectedly or gets manipulated.
Monitor delegated access continuously. Enterprises need visibility into not just the original user, but also the agent, application, tool, and downstream system involved in an action.
The common thread is simple. AI identity security cannot be bolted onto an existing IAM system as an afterthought. It has to become part of how access is designed from the beginning.
Fighting Fire with Fire and Using AI to Defend Identity
AI is also becoming part of the defense.
Machine learning can establish patterns around normal identity behavior and flag activity that does not fit those patterns. An employee suddenly logging in from an impossible location, a service account accessing an unfamiliar system, or an agent requesting an unusual permission can trigger further investigation.
That creates an opportunity to move identity security from static rules toward adaptive decisions.
Instead of waiting for a security analyst to notice a suspicious event, systems can assign risk, restrict access, trigger additional authentication, or revoke permissions automatically when the situation warrants it.
The important point is not that AI magically solves identity security. It does not.
AI is useful because identity environments have become too dynamic for humans to review every access event manually. The better model combines automated detection with clear policies and human oversight for high-risk decisions.
That is where AI identity security becomes more interesting. The same technology increasing identity complexity can also help security teams make sense of it.
結論
The biggest mistake enterprises can make is treating AI identity security as another upgrade to IAM.
The problem is larger than that.
Organizations are moving from an environment where people primarily accessed systems to one where people, applications, machines, and 自主的 agents can all act across the same digital estate. Each new identity adds convenience. It also adds another permission boundary that can fail.
The answer is not to stop using AI. That would simply push the problem somewhere else.
The smarter approach is to make identity the control layer for AI adoption. Every human, machine, and agent should have a clear identity, limited authority, traceable actions, and continuously evaluated access.
The future of enterprise security will not be defined by how many identities an organization can create. It will be defined by how well it can control what those identities are allowed to do.
日本語