Fixing the cracks in zero trust

Zero Trust has long been understood as the gold standard of security frameworks. But a surge in cyber-attacks on global governments and defence agencies is pushing that gold standard to its limits. As the digital arena becomes more hotly contested, and failings of cyber-defences increasingly spill over into the physical realm, securing the modern battlespace needs to go beyond merely defending networks. Moving and acting on data at mission speed is vital to match and counter adversaries.

 

This necessity creates new cyber-security vulnerabilities. Everfox’s latest CYBER360 study saw 84% of security leaders agree that sharing sensitive data across networks heightens risk. Zero Trust, which wasn’t designed to operate across environments with differing levels of trust and classification, does little to help manage that risk. Combining Zero Trust’s principle of verification by default with solutions to facilitate secure, policy-enforced data transfer is emerging as a necessity for national security resilience.

 

Opportunism strikes

Attempted cyber-attacks on organisations with national security significance are on the rise, with outdated infrastructure, manual processes and supply chains in the crosshairs. Nation-state adversaries aren’t simply probing networks for these weak links; they’re being actively abused as entry points to embed themselves into national defence infrastructure and critical services. Campaigns from nation-state-backed threat actors Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon have thrown this operational reality into the light.

 

While national governments and defence agencies can, and should, work to address those weak links, they’re fundamentally on the back foot if data that’s vital to detect and respond to nation-state-backed cyber-attacks cannot be trusted or is inaccessible. In modern conflict, that translates to delayed decision-making, fractured coalition coordination, and, potentially, mission failure – exactly the kind of outcomes that limit the effectiveness of global security initiatives like NATO’s data strategy for alliance (DaSA) and the U.S Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control (CJADC2) initiative.

 

Where Zero Trust falls short

To get to the root of this issue, we need to look at the foundations of security strategies. Zero Trust, the mainstay in current government and government agency strategies, locks down infrastructure by treating all traffic as suspicious. It lacks mechanisms to secure data, especially as it moves across classification levels and allied environments. Zero Trust, in isolation, is therefore a drag on operational tempo. This isn’t just an inconvenience. It’s a potential operational vulnerability spanning land, cyber-security and cloud that can lead to mission failure.

 

As established, sharing data at mission speed comes with risks that Zero Trust Access isn’t well-suited to manage. The Everfox study saw just under half of security leaders call out network visibility and threat detection (the ability to gain continuous insight into traffic, anomalies, and potential intrusions) as a key challenge faced in developing or enhancing a Zero Trust strategy.

 

But increased cyber-security risk isn’t an inevitable trade-off for more seamless sharing of data. A data-centric approach framework for security is the answer that a growing number of governments and security agencies are falling in line with.

 

How to step beyond perimeter defence

The complex nature of cyber-warfare demands multiple layers of protection. While Zero Trust Access can, and should, continue to be used to secure infrastructure with continuous verification, complementary disciplines can apply consistent protection for data across domains, partners, and mission systems:

• Data Centric Security – Ensures data stays protected wherever it resides and however it moves, preserving mission intent
• Cross Domain Solutions – Facilitates secure data exchange across networks — including those operating at different classification levels and security boundaries — without sacrificing speed or isolation

Together, this makes for a framework that reframes how resilience is built. When infrastructure security, data protection and secure Cross Domain exchange operate in concert, security architecture becomes fit for the modern conditions of cyber-warfare. Data can be trusted as it moves. Allies can act on shared intelligence without delay. And decision-makers gain the operational tempo that modern conflict demands. In a threat environment where nation-state actors are actively intruding and embedding themselves within critical infrastructure to unleash maximum damage, the margin for architectural compromise has disappeared entirely. The convergence of Zero Trust, Data Centric Security and Cross Domain Solutions goes beyond a layering of tools to act as a strategic foundation on which genuine, enduring cyber-resilience is built.

 

Rising to the challenge

The challenge of increased cyber-attacks, nation-state-backed campaigns and the convergence of digital and physical fronts in modern warfare can’t be solved by Zero Trust alone. Data Centric Security and Cross Domain Solutions need a place in national cyber-security strategies so they can shift from a posture of containment to one of genuine, enduring cyber-resilience.

 

---

 

Bryan Thompson is Chief Product Officer at Everfox

 

Main image courtesy of iStockPhoto.com and ismagilov