Skip to main content
Comply Defense
Category: Identity & Access Management

Non-Person Entity

Also known as: NPE, non-person entity, service principal, automated account
Simply put

A Non-Person Entity (NPE) is a digital identity that acts in cyberspace but is not a human being. Examples generally include automated accounts, services, or systems that operate on their own rather than being directly used by a person.

Formal definition

A Non-Person Entity (NPE) is an entity related to information technology that has a digital identity and acts in cyberspace, but is not a human actor, per the NIST glossary definition. In practice, NPEs generally encompass digital identities not directly tied to a human user, such as service principals or automated accounts. Note that some sources describe NPE as a governance term used in certain regulatory and enterprise frameworks; specific implementation, credentialing, and identity-management requirements are out of scope here and should be verified against the applicable authoritative guidance.

Why it matters

Non-Person Entities have become a central concern in identity and access management because modern information systems increasingly rely on automated accounts, services, and system-to-system interactions that operate without direct human involvement. As defined by the NIST glossary, an NPE is an entity with a digital identity that acts in cyberspace but is not a human actor. In practice these identities can proliferate quickly, and each one represents a potential access pathway that must be governed, monitored, and secured with the same rigor applied to human users.

The governance challenge is that NPEs are frequently created to support operational needs and may then persist unmanaged, complicating efforts to maintain a complete and accurate inventory of who and what has access to a system. Some sources describe NPE as a governance term used within certain regulatory and enterprise frameworks, which underscores that the concept matters not only technically but also for accountability and oversight. Compliance officers and ISSMs should treat NPE identity management as part of broader access control and identity governance obligations rather than as a purely operational detail.

Because specific credentialing, provisioning, and identity-management requirements for NPEs vary by framework and implementation, organizations should confirm applicable obligations against current authoritative guidance rather than assuming a single uniform standard applies. Note also that no specific incident statistics or figures are asserted here; readers should verify any operational metrics against primary sources.

Who it's relevant to

Information System Security Managers (ISSMs) and Security Engineers
ISSMs and security engineers responsible for access control and identity governance need to account for NPEs when inventorying identities that can act within a system. Treating automated accounts and service principals as governed identities, rather than overlooking them because no human is directly involved, supports a more complete access management posture. Specific control requirements should be confirmed against the applicable authoritative guidance.
Compliance Officers and Auditors
Because NPE is described in some sources as a governance term used within certain regulatory and enterprise frameworks, compliance officers and auditors may encounter it when assessing how an organization manages digital identities that are not tied to human users. Auditors should verify how a given framework or program defines and treats NPEs rather than assuming a uniform interpretation across environments.
Identity and Access Management (IAM) Teams
IAM teams that provision and administer digital identities are directly responsible for the automated accounts and service principals that fall under the NPE concept. Understanding that these identities act in cyberspace without a human actor helps teams apply appropriate lifecycle governance. Detailed credentialing and provisioning practices are out of scope here and should be confirmed against current authoritative sources.

Inside NPE

Digital Identity for Non-Human Actors
An NPE is a digital identity assigned to an entity that is not a person, such as a device, service, application, server, or automated process, allowing it to be authenticated and authorized within an information system. This contrasts with a person entity identity tied to an individual human user.
Credentialing Mechanisms
NPEs are generally issued machine-oriented credentials rather than user credentials. In many DoD and federal implementations these include device certificates, service certificates, or other public key infrastructure (PKI) credentials. Readers should verify the specific credential types accepted against current agency and DoD PKI policy.
Relationship to Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM)
NPEs fall within the broader ICAM discipline, which addresses how both person and non-person entities are identified, credentialed, and granted access. The precise treatment of NPEs in ICAM guidance may vary by agency and by the applicable revision of the governing policy.
Association with Access Control Requirements
Because NPEs authenticate to systems and act on them, they are typically subject to identification and authentication control families in control catalogs such as NIST SP 800-53 (maintained by NIST). The specific controls and their tailoring depend on the system's impact level and the authorizing organization.
Lifecycle and Ownership
An NPE generally has a defined lifecycle including provisioning, an assigned owner or responsible party, and eventual decommissioning. Establishing accountability for a non-human identity is a recurring element, since no individual user is inherently tied to the entity.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about NPE.

Is a Non-Person Entity (NPE) just another name for a service account or system account?
Not exactly. A service account or system account is one common example of a Non-Person Entity, but the term NPE is broader. It generally refers to any entity that is not a human person but that participates in an information system as an identity requiring authentication, this can include devices, servers, applications, workloads, and automated processes. Treating NPE and service account as interchangeable can cause organizations to overlook non-account NPEs such as devices or machine workloads that also require identity management and credentialing. Confirm the specific scope of the term against the definitions used in your governing policy, since agency and framework usage can vary.
Because an NPE is not a human, does that mean it falls outside identity and access management requirements?
No. The absence of a human user does not remove an NPE from identity, credentialing, and access control obligations. In most implementations, NPEs still require authenticated identities, appropriately provisioned and de-provisioned credentials, least-privilege access, and monitoring. Excluding NPEs from these controls is a common gap, because machine identities can be numerous, long-lived, and over-privileged. The applicable control expectations depend on your governing framework and its current revision, so verify how NPE identities are addressed in the specific baseline and policy you operate under.
How should credentials for NPEs be provisioned and rotated in practice?
NPE credentials are generally handled through the same identity lifecycle discipline applied to human accounts, provisioning tied to an authorized need, secure storage, periodic rotation, and prompt revocation when the NPE is retired or no longer needed. Because NPEs such as service accounts can be shared across processes or embedded in configurations, organizations often need additional care to avoid hard-coded or unrotated secrets. The specific rotation intervals, credential types, and storage mechanisms depend on your organization's policy and the requirements of your applicable control baseline, which you should confirm against current authoritative guidance.
How do we account for NPEs when inventorying identities and accounts for an assessment?
NPEs should generally be captured in the same account and identity inventory processes used for human users, with their type, purpose, owner, and associated privileges documented. Assessors commonly look for evidence that machine identities are known, attributed to a responsible party, and subject to access reviews. Note that assessment of an inventory is distinct from authorization; demonstrating that NPEs are inventoried and controlled supports, but does not by itself constitute, an authorization decision. Verify the specific inventory expectations against the control set and assessment procedures applicable to your system.
Who is responsible for the ownership and accountability of an NPE?
Because an NPE cannot be individually accountable in the way a person is, organizations generally assign a responsible human owner, an individual or role, for each NPE to maintain accountability for its provisioning, use, and decommissioning. Establishing clear ownership helps ensure that orphaned or unattributed machine identities do not persist. The precise assignment of ownership roles depends on your organizational structure and governing policy, which should be confirmed against your current internal procedures and applicable requirements.
How should NPEs be handled during continuous monitoring?
NPE identities are generally included within continuous monitoring activities, such as reviewing access, detecting anomalous behavior, and confirming that unused or expired NPE credentials are removed. Since an Authority to Operate is time-bound and subject to ongoing monitoring rather than permanent, changes to NPE credentials, privileges, or the introduction of new NPEs may need to be tracked as part of maintaining an authorized state. The specific continuous monitoring frequency and metrics depend on your authorization terms and applicable framework, which you should verify against current authoritative sources.

Common misconceptions

An NPE is just a shared or generic user account.
An NPE is a distinct identity for a non-human entity such as a device, service, or process, and is not equivalent to a shared human user account. Treating NPEs as generic shared logins undermines accountability and generally conflicts with identification and authentication expectations. The specific handling should be confirmed against applicable agency and DoD policy.
NPEs do not need to be managed or monitored as rigorously as human user accounts.
NPEs authenticate to and act on systems, so they generally warrant identity governance, credential lifecycle management, and monitoring comparable to person entities. Because credentials and continuous monitoring obligations vary by system and revision, practitioners should verify the applicable requirements rather than assume reduced scrutiny.
Issuing a certificate to an NPE is a one-time, permanent action.
NPE credentials typically have finite validity and are subject to a lifecycle that includes renewal, revocation, and decommissioning. Assuming a credential is permanent is a common error; ongoing management is generally required, and the exact timelines depend on the governing PKI and agency policy.

Best practices

Maintain an authoritative inventory of NPEs, recording each entity's type, assigned credential, and a designated human owner or responsible party to preserve accountability.
Apply distinct identities and machine-appropriate credentials to NPEs rather than reusing shared human user accounts, and verify accepted credential types against current agency and DoD PKI policy.
Manage NPE credentials across their full lifecycle, including provisioning, renewal, revocation, and decommissioning, treating certificates as time-bound rather than permanent.
Include NPEs in identification, authentication, and access control planning, tailoring the relevant control families (for example, those in NIST SP 800-53) to the system's impact level and authorizing organization.
Incorporate NPE activity into continuous monitoring so that non-human identities are subject to review comparable to person entities.
Confirm agency-specific ICAM and NPE requirements against current authoritative sources, since interpretations and applicable revisions may differ across federal civilian, defense, and other environments.