Skip to Content

Break-Glass Accounts in Microsoft Entra ID: Failure Modes, Detection, and Hardening

4 February 2026 by
Jaspreet Singh

Why This Deep Dive Matters

Break-glass (emergency access) accounts are designed solely to guarantee administrative access when all other methods fail. In Microsoft Entra ID environments with Conditional Access, MFA, Identity Protection, and PIM, these accounts operate outside standard workflows, making them susceptible to misconfiguration, neglect, or excessive restriction.

This deep dive examines common failure modes for break-glass accounts, methods for early detection, and strategies to strengthen emergency access without compromising its effectiveness.

This analysis is based on real tenant observations and controlled experiments documented on f11.ca (Experiment ID: EID-EXP-003).

Hands-on lab

Design Principles for Emergency Access

A break-glass account is not simply a privileged user account with fewer controls; it serves as a resilience measure. Core design principles:

  • Independence from on-premises identity and federation
  • Minimal dependency on Conditional Access evaluation
  • Predictable authentication path under failure conditions
  • Strong compensating controls outside CA and MFA

Designs that do not follow these principles increase the risk of failure.

Failure Mode 1: Identity Dependency Collapse

What Happens

Break-glass accounts synced from on-premises Active Directory or tied to federation services (AD FS, third-party IdPs) fail when:

  • Directory sync stops
  • Federation endpoints are unreachable.
  • Certificate trust breaks

Why It’s Dangerous

Emergency access becomes reliant on the same infrastructure that may already be compromised.

Detection

  • Identify break-glass accounts with OnPremisesSyncEnabled = true.
  • Review sign-in logs for federation authentication paths.

Hardening

  • Use cloud-only identities
  • Avoid any authentication path that relies on external infrastructure

Failure Mode 2: Conditional Access Inclusion

What Happens

Broad CA policies include emergency accounts unintentionally:

  • All users / all cloud apps
  • Require MFA
  • Enforce sign-in risk or location restrictions.

If Conditional Access is misconfigured or Identity Protection flags a risk, break-glass sign-in can be blocked.

Why It’s Dangerous

Conditional Access can become a single point of failure for administration.

Detection

  • Filter CA policy assignments for emergency access accounts
  • Simulate sign-in using policy evaluation (What If tool)

Hardening

  • Exclude at least one break-glass account from all CA policies.
  • Apply compensating controls instead of CA enforcement.

Failure Mode 3: MFA Enforcement

What Happens

Emergency accounts are forced through MFA:

  • Authenticator app unreachable
  • SMS/voice unavailable
  • MFA registration policy blocks sign-in

Why It’s Dangerous

MFA may be unavailable during identity or telecommunications outages.

Detection

  • Review MFA status for emergency accounts.
  • Inspect authentication details in sign-in logs.

Hardening

  • Do not require MFA on at least one break-glass account.
  • Protect credentials using strong passwords and offline storage.

Failure Mode 4: Credential Custody Risk

What Happens

Credentials are:

  • Stored in shared documents
  • Known to a single administrator
  • Placed in personal password managers

Why It’s Dangerous

Emergency access may fail if key personnel are unavailable or if credentials are compromised.

Detection

  • Review documented storage locations.
  • Identify single-custodian dependency

Hardening

  • Store credentials in enterprise vaults or physical safes
  • Split knowledge across multiple trusted custodians
  • Document retrieval and rotation procedures

Failure Mode 5: Silent Monitoring Gaps

What Happens

Emergency accounts have no:

  • Dedicated sign-in alerts
  • High-signal monitoring
  • Periodic validation tests

Break-glass account usage may go unnoticed or be detected too late.

Why It’s Dangerous

Attackers often target emergency accounts because they are infrequently monitored.

Detection

  • Review alert coverage for emergency sign-ins
  • Inspect sign-in frequency and patterns.

Hardening

  • Create high-priority alerts for any break-glass sign-in
  • Monitor failed and successful attempts.
  • Treat usage as a security incident until proven otherwise.

Validation: Testing Without Locking Yourself Out

Safe validation steps:

  1. Verify CA exclusions using policy simulation.
  2. Perform sign-in tests during change windows.
  3. Document test results and recovery steps
  4. Testing is essential to confirm that emergency access functions as intended. access works.

Evidence-Based Conclusion

Break-glass accounts often fail not due to complexity, but because they are managed like standard administrative identities. In real-world and lab-tested environments, most failures stem from:

  • Overlapping Conditional Access
  • MFA enforcement
  • Identity dependency chains
  • Poor credential custody

Emergency access should be designed for worst-case scenarios, rather than relying solely on standard best practices.

 If you have not tested your break-glass account under failure conditions, you do not have emergency access; you have assumptions.


Related Evidence & Guidance

Hands-on Lab (F11)

Business Risk View


About the Author

Jaspreet Singh

Identity & Security Engineer

Hands-on Entra ID experiments, real-world attack paths, and evidence-based security analysis.

Microsoft Entra ID Sign-In Logs: A Technical Deep Dive Into Visibility Gaps