Which authentication method suits your business?
Choosing the right authentication method for your MFP is one of the first decisions on the path to secure document management. NFC badge, PIN code, smartphone app or biometrics — each method has its strengths and weaknesses. The right choice depends on your security requirements, company size and existing systems.
This comparison helps you find the authentication method that best fits your organisation — from a quick badge tap to a highly secure two-factor solution.
Five methods, their strengths and their limitations
| Criterion | NFC/RFID Badge | PIN Code | Smartphone (BLE) | Biometrics | 2-Factor (Badge+PIN) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Speed | <1 second | 3-5 seconds | 2-3 seconds | 1-2 seconds | 3-5 seconds |
| Security | Medium | Low-Medium | Medium-High | High | Very high |
| Hardware cost | 2-5 EUR/card + reader | None | None (BYOD) | 200-500 EUR/sensor | 2-5 EUR/card + reader |
| User-friendliness | Very high | Medium | High | High | Medium |
| Biggest risk | Card loss | PIN sharing | App required | Privacy concerns | Higher effort |
| Admin overhead | Low | Medium (PIN resets) | Medium (app support) | High (enrolment) | Low-Medium |
Strengths, weaknesses and typical use cases
The NFC card is by far the most popular authentication method at the MFP — and for good reason. Tapping the card takes less than a second, nothing needs to be typed in, and the cards are robust and long-lasting. In many organisations, NFC cards are already in use as building access cards, eliminating the need to procure additional cards.
Ideal for: Organisations of any size seeking fast, straightforward authentication. Particularly suitable when access cards are already in use.
The PIN code requires no additional hardware — it is entered directly on the MFP display. This makes it the most cost-effective solution. However, there is a significant risk: PINs are shared, written on sticky notes or passed along. Additionally, entering a 4- to 6-digit PIN takes considerably longer than a badge tap.
Ideal for: Small businesses with few devices that do not use access cards and have a limited budget. Better than no authentication at all.
Smartphone authentication uses Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) or an app to identify the user at the MFP. The advantage: employees carry their smartphone anyway (BYOD principle). The disadvantage: an app must be installed and configured, and not all employees are willing to install a company app on their personal device.
Ideal for: Tech-savvy organisations with younger staff who do not want to build up a physical card inventory.
Fingerprint or facial recognition offers the highest security, as biometric features cannot be transferred. However, sensors are significantly more expensive than card readers, and the GDPR imposes strict requirements on the processing of biometric data. In practice, biometric authentication at MFPs is therefore relatively rare.
Ideal for: High-security areas in government agencies or research facilities where maximum security takes priority over cost and convenience.
The combination of badge and PIN offers the best of both worlds: the card alone is not enough, and the PIN alone is not enough either. Even if a card is lost, it cannot be misused without the corresponding PIN. The downside is the slightly higher time required per login.
Ideal for: Law firms, government agencies and businesses that process particularly sensitive documents and must meet the highest security requirements.
One card for door access, printer, time tracking and canteen
A major advantage of badge authentication: the same NFC card can be used across multiple systems. This simplifies administration and increases employee acceptance.
One card, many functions: If you already use an access system with NFC cards, check whether the same cards can also be used at the MFP. In most cases, this is possible without replacing cards — you simply need a compatible card reader at the device.
The right method for every situation
Recommendation: NFC badge or PIN — The simplest and most cost-effective entry point. If access cards are already available, the badge is the clear choice. Without existing cards, a PIN system can serve as a starter solution.
Recommendation: NFC badge with Active Directory integration — User management is handled centrally in AD, permissions are synchronised automatically. The badge offers the best compromise between security, speed and user-friendliness.
Recommendation: Two-factor (badge + PIN) — For organisations processing particularly sensitive data, two-factor authentication provides the highest security. The additional few seconds per login pale in comparison to the risk of a data protection violation.
Recommendation: NFC badge with SSO integration — In large organisations, single sign-on is critical. The badge at the MFP automatically loads personal profiles and print jobs. Integration into existing SSO infrastructure minimises administrative overhead.
Docuflair Access Control supports all common authentication methods — from simple badge to two-factor solutions. In a free demo, we will show you which method best suits your requirements.
Answers to the most important questions about MFP authentication
The most secure method is two-factor authentication (2FA), such as badge + PIN. It combines possession (the card) with knowledge (the PIN code). Even if a card is lost, it cannot be misused without the corresponding PIN. For most SMBs, however, a simple badge system already provides a significantly higher security level than no authentication at all.
Yes, in most cases existing access cards can be reused. Docuflair Access Control supports all common card formats such as Mifare Classic, Mifare DESFire, HID iClass and Legic. The prerequisite is a compatible card reader at the MFP. This way, employees use a single card for door access, MFP and canteen.
The costs are manageable: NFC cards cost 2 to 5 euros each, USB card readers for MFPs range from 50 to 150 euros. If access cards already exist, card costs are eliminated. The Docuflair Access Control software licence is priced per device. Overall, the investment quickly pays for itself through reduced print costs and avoided data protection violations.