Identity verification remains a necessary defence against cybercrime, but it addresses only one stage of the user journey. It confirms identity when a person is onboarded or authenticated; it does not prove that the same person controls the session afterwards.
For CISOs, this creates a clear security gap: authentication may be valid while the person using the authenticated account is not.
What South African cybersecurity data shows
Preliminary findings from the 2026 ITWeb Brainstorm CISO Survey place unauthorised access and hacking among the leading risks facing South African organisations.
The published findings report that:
- 51% of respondents identified unauthorised access or hacking as a leading cyber risk.
- 28.3% reported identity-theft incidents during the preceding year.
- 75% rated their maturity in managing machine identities at three out of five or lower.
- Phishing and social engineering were the two most frequently reported security incidents.
These figures do not mean that authentication has failed as a security control. They show that identity risk extends beyond a single login event and involves people, credentials, devices, sessions and non-human identities.
The limitation of point-in-time authentication
Multi-factor authentication, biometric login, document verification and passwordless authentication can make unauthorised login more difficult. Their limitation is temporal: they establish trust at a particular point.
Once access has been granted, many systems continue to trust the session until it expires or suspicious behaviour is detected.
During that period, an attacker may obtain a session token, take control of an authenticated device, persuade a user to share access or exploit stolen credentials. An internal user may also give another person access to an approved session.
In each case, the authentication event can be legitimate while the subsequent activity is not.
Continuous identity assurance closes part of the gap
Continuous identity assurance is the ongoing evaluation of whether the authenticated individual remains present and in control.
Continuous Facial Recognition with Liveness provides one way of adding this assurance. Facial comparison helps verify that the present user matches the enrolled identity, while liveness detection helps distinguish a live participant from certain presentation attacks.
Through the partnership between Datanamix and YEO Messaging, organisations can integrate Continuous Facial Recognition with Liveness using YEO Messaging’s Continuous Facial Recognition SDK.
The technology should be understood as an additional security layer. It does not remove the need for secure onboarding, multi-factor authentication, device security, behavioural monitoring or incident response.
Where continuous assurance may be most useful
Continuous verification is unlikely to be necessary for every user action. A risk-based implementation can prioritise situations in which an account takeover would cause substantial harm.
Examples include:
- Access to privileged administrative systems
- Approval of sensitive financial transactions
- Viewing or exporting confidential information
- Remote access to regulated systems
- High-trust messaging, voice and video communications
- Sessions involving personal or customer data
Organisations should also evaluate privacy, consent, data governance, accessibility, retention and user-experience requirements before deploying biometric technology.
Supporting Zero Trust principles
Zero Trust security is based on continually evaluating access rather than assuming that trust persists after authentication.
Continuous identity assurance supports this principle by adding evidence about the person currently using the session. It allows existing identity providers and authentication technologies to remain in place while strengthening assurance during higher-risk interactions.
Secure Enterprise Messaging can extend the same principle to business communications by combining continuously verified identities with enterprise-grade encryption across messaging, voice and video.
The practical conclusion for CISOs
Identity verification is necessary, but it is not sufficient on its own to address every form of unauthorised access.
A more resilient strategy combines identity verification at onboarding, strong authentication at login, ongoing session assurance and additional controls for high-risk actions.
Datanamix combines identity verification, Continuous Facial Recognition with Liveness and Secure Enterprise Messaging to support this layered approach. The objective is not to replace existing authentication investments, but to maintain stronger confidence in identity after login.
Contact Datanamix to discuss continuous identity assurance for your organisation.
