![]() Zero trust concepts improve security and reduce security overhead. ![]() Google has called the idea “BeyondCorp” in the context of corporate IT (they moved to this model to improve their own security after Operation Aurora). This general approach to security was branded “zero trust” by Forrester in 2010. In short, access should be based on identity. It’s a simple concept, really: what matters is who or what is making a request, not where a request comes from. Instead of relying on IP and MAC addresses to determine access we can cryptographically authenticate the identity of people and software making requests. Access requests that would help someone do their job faster are frequently denied because the perimeter is all-or-nothing and fine-grained access cannot be granted.Ī better security model exists. VPNs are notoriously frustrating for users. Maintaining a perimeter is an operational burden. Security considerations aside, perimeter security is expensive and annoying. One slip up that allows an attacker inside the perimeter and it’s game over. This paradigm relies on assumptions that nobody actually believes are true: that people are never careless or dishonest and never make mistakes. Inside the perimeter traffic is mostly trusted. They rely on “perimeter” security: a firewall guarding access to a protected network. ![]() The way most software systems are secured today is fundamentally flawed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |