Connect with us

Feature/OPED

El-Rufai’s Body Bags Threat: Appraising the Electoral and Diplomacy Effects

Published

on

By Omoshola Deji

Election in Nigeria is more of a war than a contest. The benefits of public office attract people to politics and make them desperate for power. Candidates employ devious tactics to win, as if losing is punishable by death. They dish out hate speeches and uncouth statements without considering the imminent doom such could drag Nigeria into. Governor Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State is in the eye of the storm. He stirred the hornet’s nest when he issued a death threat to foreigners who may want to question the conduct of the general elections starting February 16. This piece assesses the effect of El-Rufai’s statement on political behaviour and Nigeria’s foreign relations.

The relationship between Nigeria’s executive arm of government and the global community has been uncordial lately. The United States (US), United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) are casting doubt on the credibility of the forthcoming elections based on President Muhammadu Buhari’s controversial suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen. While commenting on the foreign stance during a live television program on 5 February, 2019, El-Rufai expressed that “those that are calling for anyone to come and intervene in Nigeria, we are waiting for the person that would come and intervene, they would go back in BODY BAGS (emphasis mine), because nobody will come to Nigeria and tell us how to run our country”. A ‘body bag’ is a carrier bag used for moving corpse from a battleground, or an accident or crime scene.

Many thought the outrage that greeted the threat would make El-Rufai eat his words, but that never happened. The threat was rather defined as patriotism. El-Rufai argued in a statement issued by his spokesman, Samuel Aruwan, that “affirming a country will defend itself against needless intervention is the kind of statement you expect to hear from a patriot. It is not a call to violence. Warning about the consequences of meddling in another country’s affairs is legitimate”.

The global community and Nigerians who were infuriated by El-Rufai’s idiocy were hoping the Federal Government would caution him, but that also never happened. The Presidency threw her weight behind El-Rufai, saying he “spoke strongly in defense of national interest”. This is unsurprising as El-Rufai is a chieftain of the ruling party and staunch supporter of President Muhammadu Buhari. But how can the government of a country rationalize a threat to foreigners as national interest? The Presidency should have stayed mute than commit such a pricey blunder. National interest is the interest of a country as a whole, not that of subordinate areas or groups. El-Rufai spoke in defense of the ruling cabal’s interest, not for the majority of Nigerians.

President Buhari’s consistent show of double standard makes him undeserving of integrity accolades. His government labels El-Rufai’s threat a display of patriotism while unarmed Biafra secession campaigners were declared terrorists. The President’s henchmen warning the international community not to interfere in Nigeria’s electoral process praised their interference when it favoured Buhari in 2015. Former US President Barrack Obama influenced the last presidential election against ex-President Goodluck Jonathan. Obama released a video urging Nigerians to open the ‘next chapter’ with their votes when an incumbent President is participating in the election.

Buhari applauded the UK, US and EU when they condemned the postponement of the 2015 elections. Buhari, then a presidential candidate, hailed the foreign interventions, even as Jonathan and his supporters stayed calm and eventually lost the election. The same foreign authorities of 2015 recently condemned the alleged politically motivated suspension of the CJN and the Buhari government is warning them not to meddle in Nigeria’s politics. Such glaring display of double standard approach demeans Buhari’s acclaimed integrity. Buhari only cries foul when he is not profiting; any action or person that does not favour him is wrong, corrupt, unpatriotic or unwelcome.

The unintended grievous consequence of El-Rufai’s statement is the troubles Nigerians in the diaspora would face if any foreigner is injured or killed. The US, UK and Europe are Nigerians choice destinations. Those seeking greener pastures would be denied visas and those already in would be massively deported. We must not bite what we can’t chew! El-Rufai and the Nigerian government are threatening nations whose citizens visiting and living in Nigeria are law-abiding, while Nigerians are not the best-behaved persons overseas. Our nationals residing abroad illegally, disobeying laws and committing heinous crimes would suffer the foreign nation’s retaliatory measures the most. Nigeria cannot long-survive the sanctions that’ll be stamped on her if any harm befalls the foreign observers. The nation imports almost everything and is heavily dependent on foreign aid and loans.

El-Rufai’s uncouth statement would affect the inflow of foreign direct investments. No sane stranger would invest huge in a country whose leaders are threatening foreigners, undermining the rule of law and interfering with the independence of the judiciary.

Many support El-Rufai’s notion that Nigeria should be left alone to run her affairs without any external interference. The degree and limitation of nations sovereignty is an age-long scholarly debate. Nigeria is a member of many foreign organizations and a signatory to many treaties. The membership of global and regional organizations such as the United Nations and African Union has limited the nation’s sovereignty. Identical to the social contract theory on state evolution, nations overtly or covertly submit part of their sovereignty when they join international organizations.

The signing of treaties and embracing the globally recommended mode of governance and development, such as upholding democracy and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, is a pointer that nations are expected to operate based on standards. Any nation that wants to be absolutely sovereign must not belong to any global body and such is virtually impossible. Nations are sovereign, but not absolutely sovereign. If nations are fully sovereign, why do international organizations set governing standards and principles and sanction erring nations? If nations are truly sovereign, why is the UN Security Council empowered to authorize military operations against nations?

Globalization has bond nations together in such a way that it is difficult for them not to meddle in each other’s affairs. Most nations have assets, investments and interests they care about in several other nations. For example, MTN is a South-African investment in Nigeria and any political-economic challenge that may affect MTN would naturally generate reactions from South Africa.

Foreign interventions are essential and commendable, but they are not always done out of good intents. The interventions are sometimes done to pave way for the exploitation of emerging nation’s resources. The unending war in Congo is a good example. The developed nations are renowned in providing dishonest economic interventions that entrench dependency. Foreign intervention has helped and harmed Nigeria’s economy. The nation lost interest in agriculture when oil multinational corporations (OMNCs) discovered and began oil exploration in the Niger-Delta.

The OMNC’s capital, skill and technology developed the oil sector, but that has largely been for their own benefit. Inhabitants of the region have lost their lands and marines to oil spills. The late Ken Saro-Wiwa’s assertion captures it rightly that they have no land to farm, no water to drink and no air to breathe. The OMNCs also refines oil abroad, instead of constructing refineries in Nigeria to create jobs and boost development. Foreign economic interventions often hinder emerging nation’s growth, but they are the lifesaving oxygen during the outbreak of epidemics such as Ebola, cholera and polio.

The politicians bragging that Nigeria does not need foreign interventions are those hoping to profit from the imperfections of our electoral system. The nation has a lot to gain from foreign electoral interventions and should embrace it, so long as the interventions do not influence election results. External intervention – especially via observations and recommendations – is a means of bettering the quality of our elections. The ruling party has no reason to move against foreign observers if the elections are going to be free, fair and credible. Observing elections help prevent fraud or manipulations, or expose such anomalies if they happen. Foreign observers are a credible means of monitoring the extremes of incumbent seeking re-election, especially in our clime where election results can easily be manipulated.

Observing the electoral process enables nations with mature democracies to recommend ways through which the electioneering process can be strengthened. It can lead to the correction of errors or weak practices, even while the election is ongoing. An observation of the electoral process by foreign persons and groups often boost the public and oppositions confidence in the results. Once the transparency of an electoral process convinces observers to release positive commentaries, the opposition parties may consider throwing in the towel and such increase the legitimacy of the government the election produce.

The US, UK and Europe’s warning is the essential stitch in time that saves nine. Issuing warnings and sanctions is the western nation’s means of avoiding the huge expenses they bare when conflict occur in developing nations. The West is the leading provider of military and humanitarian aid to troubled nations. Cautioning political actors is not inappropriate, considering the wanton destruction of lives and properties war brings.

Anarchy will only worsen Nigeria’s underdevelopment as amenities destroyed won’t not be promptly fixed due to paucity of funds. Even if available, such fund is better spent on settling striking unions and providing amenities. War is not an option for any nation that value lives. Infrastructures can be fixed, the economy can be revived, but lives lost can never be regained. Moreover, Nigeria does not have the capacity to confront the global powers if such need arises; not with the demoralized army struggling to conquer Boko-Haram.

El-Rufai and his encouragers need to act cautiously and be wary of the consequence of their actions on Nigeria. The countries of the foreigners being threatened do not joke with their citizens’ lives. They are not like the Nigerian government that tolerates Boko-Haram and herdsmen. Issues based campaigns must be revived and the purveyors of hate speech and fake news should be appropriately sanctioned or prosecuted. President Muhammadu Buhari owes Nigeria the gratitude of ensuring the elections are free, fair and credible. The elections would pass, Nigeria shall remain.

Omoshola Deji is a political and public affairs analyst. He wrote in via mo******@***oo.com

Dipo Olowookere is a journalist based in Nigeria that has passion for reporting business news stories. At his leisure time, he watches football and supports 3SC of Ibadan. Mr Olowookere can be reached via [email protected]

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feature/OPED

History is Watching: Tinubu’s Moment to Rescue Nigeria’s Stolen Future

Published

on

Tinubu's Portrait

By Blaise Udunze

Governance is not complicated. It is about people and the resources entrusted to serve them. When resources are managed wisely, the people prosper, and prosperity spreads. Mismanage them, and poverty multiplies. Nigeria’s tragedy is not scarcity. It is stewardship.

For decades, Nigeria, described as Africa’s largest oil producer, has earned hundreds of billions of dollars, yet remains home to some of the world’s poorest citizens. That contradiction is not accidental. It is systemic. It reflects policy distortion, institutional weakness, and a culture of impunity that has too often treated public wealth as political spoils rather than a national trust.

The Abuja-based Independent Media and Policy Initiative (IMPI) recently captured this paradox bluntly by saying, Nigeria’s poverty crisis is not the result of inadequate resources, but of persistent failure to manage them prudently and sustainably. It described the crisis as a “self-inflicted economic malady.” That phrase should trouble every public official.

Between 1980 and 2015, Nigeria rode multiple oil booms. Instead of converting windfalls into diversified productivity, the country succumbed to what economists call the Dutch disease. Oil revenues surged. The naira appreciated. Imports became cheaper. Domestic production became uncompetitive. Agriculture declined. Manufacturing withered.

IMPI’s analysis shows that between 1980 and 1986, exchange rate appreciation crippled local industries and turned Nigeria from a major agricultural exporter into a net food importer. Cocoa, palm oil, and rubber, once pillars of export strength, gave way to dependency. A parallel distortion emerged, the so-called “Nigerian disease.” Rural labour migrated to cities in search of oil-fueled wage spikes. Farming declined. Food insecurity deepened, which has continued to linger each day. Over-mechanised and poorly coordinated agricultural investments, uncompleted irrigation projects, and subsidies skewed toward politically connected elites widened inequality. Oil wealth created the wrong impression of prosperity while hollowing out the economy’s productive core.

Former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo once framed the issue plainly: Nigeria’s challenge is not geographical restructuring but resource management and service delivery. After decades of vast oil earnings, the uncomfortable question remains. Where is the infrastructure?

If mismanagement were purely historical, recovery might simply require time and discipline. But the problem is not confined to the past, and this is because between 2010 and 2026, an estimated $214 billion, roughly N300 trillion, has been flagged as missing, diverted, unrecovered, irregularly spent, or trapped in non-transparent fiscal structures. These figures reveal that they are not speculative but arise from audit reports, legislative investigations, civil society litigation, and investigative findings across administrations.

The oil sector alone provides sobering examples. In 2014, unremitted oil revenues triggered national outrage. Years later, audit queries continue to trail the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited. The names of institutions change. The pattern persists. The Central Bank of Nigeria has also faced audit alarms over trillions in unremitted surpluses and questionable intervention facilities. Auditor-General has flagged failures to remit operating surpluses into the Consolidated Revenue Fund, alongside hundreds of billions allegedly disbursed to unidentified beneficiaries under intervention schemes, which is alarming and a common fraudulent practice.

Across ministries, departments, and agencies, trillions have been cited in unsupported expenditures, unremitted taxes, procurement irregularities, and statutory liabilities left unrecovered. The institutions differ. The language of audit reports varies. The years change. The pattern does not.

A natural occurrence, which is the plain truth, and unarguably, is that when electricity funds disappear, the grid collapses. Also, when agricultural loans remain unrecovered, food prices surge. The same goes when social investment programmes stall due to bureaucratic lack of transparency; the vulnerable remain exposed. Nigeria borrows not only because revenue is insufficient but because leakage is persistent.

The 2026 fiscal projections sharpen the dilemma. This has continued to raise concern as seen in the proposed N58.47 trillion budget, which carries a N25.91 trillion deficit, with N15.9 trillion allocated to debt servicing. What signifies a systemic failure is that nearly half of the projected federal revenue will service past loans before development priorities are funded. The truth be told, borrowing is not inherently destructive. Economies such as the United States deploy deficit financing strategically to expand productivity. The difference lies in what the borrowing finances.

To date, Nigeria’s deficits are increasingly funded by recurrent obligations rather than productivity-enhancing infrastructure. This is why Nigeria’s domestic borrowing persistently crowds out private-sector credit, driving up interest rates and stifling enterprise. Time after time, the nation has continued to witness how weak revenue mobilisation, overt oil dependence, and institutional inefficiencies compound the strain, and for these reasons, public debt is projected to has surpass N177.14 trillion by the end of 2026, which is driven by the budget deficit in 2026 Appropriation Bill.

Based on what is obtainable in other advance country, debt becomes sustainable only when borrowed funds are channeled into growth-enhancing investments, institutions ensure transparency and value for money, and economic expansion outpaces debt accumulation. When these conditions weaken, deficits evolve into a fiscal trap.

Despite some of the challenges occasioned by mismanaged resources and leakages, policymakers project cautious optimism. The Central Bank forecasts GDP growth of approximately 4.49 percent, moderating inflation, and foreign reserves exceeding $50 billion. On paper, stability appears to be returning. But stability is not prosperity.

Take, for instance, between 2006 and 2014, Nigeria recorded average GDP growth rates of six to seven percent, peaking near eight percent. Yet poverty remained stubbornly high, judging by the lived experience of the populace. This shows that growth without inclusion is only an arithmetic, not development. Today, households confront elevated food prices despite the report that food inflation fell from 29.63 per cent in January 2025 to 8.89 per cent in January 2026, energy costs, and unemployment. Yes, one may say that the exchange-rate unification and fuel subsidy removal were economically rational reforms. However, without aggressive domestic production expansion and credible social safety nets, adjustment costs fall heavily on citizens.

The concept of the “resource curse,” coined by Professor Richard Auty, explains why resource-rich nations often experience weaker institutions and lower long-term growth than resource-poor peers. Nigeria truly exemplifies that irony. Yet the curse is not inevitable. This is because countries such as Norway and Botswana transformed natural resource wealth into long-term prosperity through disciplined institutions, sovereign wealth management, and uncompromising transparency, which happens to be foreign to Nigeria’s system. The difference was not geology. It was governance.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has never been quite over resource plundering as he lamented that Nigeria has squandered divine gifts. The same lies with the former Minister George Akume, who warned that no nation grows if a quarter of its resources are consistently mismanaged. The former Anambra governor, Peter Obi, observed bluntly that wealth cannot be entrusted to those without integrity. The United Nations is also amongst those who have repeatedly warned that mismanaged natural resources fuel instability and conflict. Where institutions are weak, resource wealth becomes combustible. Nigeria has navigated that edge for decades.

Nigeria does not suffer from a shortage of reform announcements. It suffers from a gap between announcement and enforcement. The Treasury Single Account was designed to consolidate public funds under constitutional oversight. Yet significant funds have periodically remained outside complete transparency. The problem is that audit findings often accumulate without visible recovery, prosecution, or systemic reform.

The reality is that if every naira saved from subsidy reform is not transparently reinvested in infrastructure, healthcare, education, and productivity, public trust will erode further. If intervention facilities are not tracked and repaid, agriculture will stagnate. If oil revenues are not fully remitted and independently audited, diversification will remain rhetorical, just as they have defined the system today. What will definitely propel a change when visible enforcement, recoveries, prosecutions, and institutional strengthening must replace quiet reports and circular memos.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu stands at a consequential intersection due to the critical issues unfolding. His administration has initiated painful but necessary reforms in the areas of fuel subsidy removal, exchange-rate unification, and fiscal restructuring. One stands to say that these measures aim to restore macroeconomic order. But for a fact, macroeconomic stability is a foundation, not a destination. His presidency will either mark the beginning of Nigeria’s fiscal rescue or consolidate a system that mortgages tomorrow to survive today.

Human capital cannot remain peripheral. Education aligned with labour-market needs, vocational capacity, healthcare access, and social protection are economic multiplier, not welfare indulgences. Capital expenditure must prioritise integrated infrastructure like power transmission, logistics corridors, and digital connectivity, that unlocks productivity. Every earned naira must enter the Federation Account transparently. Every statutory surplus must be constitutionally remitted. Every diversion must carry a consequence.

One thing that must be understood today is that Nigeria’s future will not be determined solely by oil output or GDP growth percentages. It will be determined by whether resources translate into reliable electricity, functioning roads, expanding industries, competitive exports, and rising household incomes. A nation can borrow to build bridges. Or it can borrow to pay salaries. The former compounds growth. The latter compounds debt.

If deficits translate into visible infrastructure, industrial expansion, thriving private enterprise, and strengthened revenue generation, history will record this era as a bold recalibration. If not, it will be remembered as deferred reckoning.

Nigeria has been wealthy for decades. What it has lacked is disciplined guardianship of that wealth. End the era of systemic leakage and institutional silence, or preside over its continuation. The choice is stark but clear. The point is, this is not just about one leader’s legacy; it is about the future of over 200 million Nigerians and generations.

And for nearly 200 million Nigerians, the outcome will define not just a presidency, but a generation.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: bl***********@***il.com

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

How Christians Can Stay Connected to Their Faith During This Lenten Period

Published

on

Lenten Period

It’s that time of year again, when Christians come together in fasting and prayer. Whether observing the traditional Lent or entering a focused period of reflection, it’s a chance to connect more deeply with God, and for many, this season even sets the tone for the year ahead.

Of course, staying focused isn’t always easy. Life has a way of throwing distractions your way, a nosy neighbour, a bus driver who refuses to give you your change, or that colleague testing your patience. Keeping your peace takes intention, and turning off the noise and staying on course requires an act of devotion.

Fasting is meant to create a quiet space in your life, but if that space isn’t filled with something meaningful, old habits can creep back in. Sustaining that focus requires reinforcement beyond physical gatherings, and one way to do so is to tune in to faith-based programming to remain spiritually aligned throughout the period and beyond.

On GOtv, Christian channels such as Dove TV channel 113, Faith TV and Trace Gospel provide sermons, worship experiences and teachings that echo what is being practised in churches across the country.

From intentional conversations on Faith TV on GOtv channel 110 to true worship on Trace Gospel on channel 47, these channels provide nurturing content rooted in biblical teaching, worship, and life application. Viewers are met with inspiring sermons, reflections on scripture, and worship sessions that help form a rhythm of devotion. During fasting periods, this kind of consistent spiritual input becomes a source of encouragement, helping believers stay anchored in prayer and mindful of God’s presence throughout their daily routines.

To catch all these channels and more, simply subscribe, upgrade, or reconnect by downloading the MyGOtv App or dialling *288#. You can also stream anytime with the GOtv Stream App.

Plus, with the We Got You offer, available until 28th February 2026, subscribers automatically upgrade to the next package at no extra cost, giving you access to more channels this season.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Turning Stolen Hardware into a Data Dead-End

Published

on

Apu Pavithran Turning Stolen Hardware

By Apu Pavithran

In Johannesburg, the “city of gold,” the most valuable resource being mined isn’t underground; it’s in the pockets of your employees.

With an average of 189 cellphones reported stolen daily in South Africa, Gauteng province has become the hub of a growing enterprise risk landscape.

For IT leaders across the continent, a “lost phone” is rarely a matter of a misplaced device. It is frequently the result of a coordinated “snatch and grab,” where the hardware is incidental, and corporate data is the true objective.

Industry reports show that 68% of company-owned device breaches stem from lost or stolen hardware. In this context, treating mobile security as a “nice-to-have” insurance policy is no longer an option. It must function as an operational control designed for inevitability.

In the City of Gold, Data Is the Real Prize

When a fintech agent’s device vanishes, the $300 handset cost is a rounding error. The real exposure lies in what that device represents: authorised access to enterprise systems, financial tools, customer data, and internal networks.

Attackers typically pursue one of two outcomes: a quick wipe for resale on the secondary market or, far more dangerously, a deep dive into corporate apps to extract liquid assets or sellable data.

Clearly, many organisations operate under the dangerous assumption that default manufacturer security is sufficient. In reality, a PIN or fingerprint is a flimsy barrier if a device is misconfigured or snatched while unlocked. Once an attacker gets in, they aren’t just holding a phone; they are holding the keys to copy data, reset passwords, or even access admin tools.

The risk intensifies when identity-verification systems are tied directly to the compromised device. Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA), widely regarded as a gold standard, can become a vulnerability if the authentication factor and the primary access point reside on the same compromised device. In such cases, the attacker may not just have a phone; they now have a valid digital identity.

The exposure does not end at authentication. It expands with the structure of the modern workforce.

65% of African SMEs and startups now operate distributed teams. The Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) culture has left many IT departments blind to the health of their fleet, as personal devices may be outdated or jailbroken without any easy way to know.

Device theft is not new in Africa. High-profile incidents, including stolen government hardware, reinforce a simple truth: physical loss is inevitable. The real measure of resilience is whether that loss has any residual value. You may not stop the theft. But you can eliminate the reward.

Theft Is Inevitable, Exposure is Not

If theft cannot always be prevented, systems must be designed so that stolen devices yield nothing of consequence. This shift requires structured, automated controls designed to contain risk the moment loss occurs.

Develop an Incident Response Plan (IRP)
The moment a device is reported missing, predefined actions should trigger automatically: access revocation, session termination, credential reset and remote lock or wipe.

However, such technical playbooks are only as fast as the people who trigger them. Employees must be trained as the first line of defence —not just in the use of strong PINs and biometrics, but in the critical culture of immediate reporting. In high-risk environments, containment windows are measured in minutes, not hours.

Audit and Monitor the Fleet Regularly

Control begins with visibility. Without a continuous, comprehensive audit, IT teams are left responding to incidents after damage has occurred.

Opting for tools like Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) allows IT teams to spot subtle, suspicious activities or unusual access attempts that signal a compromised device.

Review Device Security Policies
Security controls must be enforced at the management layer, not left to user discretion. Encryption, patch updates and screen-lock policies should be mandatory across corporate devices.

In BYOD environments, ownership-aware policies are essential. Corporate data must remain governed by enterprise controls regardless of device ownership.

Decouple Identity from the Device
Legacy SMS-based authentication models introduce avoidable risk when the authentication channel resides on the compromised handset. Stronger identity models, including hardware tokens, reduce this dependency.

At the same time, native anti-theft features introduced by Apple and Google, such as behavioural theft detection and enforced security delays, add valuable defensive layers. These controls should be embedded into enterprise baselines rather than treated as optional enhancements.

When Stolen Hardware Becomes Worthless

With POPIA penalties now reaching up to R10 million or a decade of imprisonment for serious data loss offences, the Information Regulator has made one thing clear: liability is strict, and the financial fallout is absolute. Yet, a PwC survey reveals a staggering gap: only 28% of South African organisations are prioritising proactive security over reactive firefighting.

At the same time, the continent is battling a massive cybersecurity skills shortage. Enterprises simply do not have the boots on the ground to manually patch every vulnerability or chase every “lost” terminal. In this climate, the only viable path is to automate the defence of your data.

Modern mobile device management (MDM) platforms provide this automation layer.

In field operations, “where” is the first indicator of “what.” If a tablet assigned to a Cape Town district suddenly pings on a highway heading out of the city, you don’t need a notification an hour later—you need an immediate response. An effective MDM system offers geofencing capabilities, automatically triggering a remote lock when devices breach predefined zones.

On Supervised iOS and Android Enterprise devices, enforced Factory Reset Protection (FRP) ensures that even after a forced wipe, the device cannot be reactivated without organisational credentials, eliminating resale value.

For BYOD environments, we cannot ignore the fear that corporate oversight equates to a digital invasion of personal lives. However, containerization through managed Work Profiles creates a secure boundary between corporate and personal data. This enables selective wipe capabilities, removing enterprise assets without intruding on personal privacy.

When integrated with identity providers, device posture and user identity can be evaluated together through multi-condition compliance rules. Access can then be granted, restricted, or revoked based on real-time risk signals.

Platforms built around unified endpoint management and identity integration enable this model of control. At Hexnode, this convergence of device governance and identity enforcement forms the foundation of a proactive security mandate. It transforms mobile fleets from distributed risk points into centrally controlled assets.

In high-risk environments, security cannot be passive. The goal is not recovery. It is irrelevant, ensuring that once a device leaves authorised hands, it holds no data, no identity leverage, and no operational value.

Apu Pavithran is the CEO and founder of Hexnode

Continue Reading

Trending