About the Operational Zero Trust Architecture Portions of Executive Order 14028

Phishing-resistant government systems are no longer a “nice-to-have,” but are now a federal mandate. Government agency information technology (IT) leaders are compelled to meet Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) mandates.

One such mandate is Executive Order 14028 – Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity, originally issued by President Joe Biden in 2021. Although portions of this executive order were subsequently modified by Executive Order 14306, the impetus toward ZTA remains.

As you can see from the sections quoted below, the Federal Government agency emphasis focuses on:

  • Zero Trust Architecture, which supersedes the prior notion that the “internal” portions of a network can be trusted. Threats can come from anywhere.
  • Securing cloud implementations, including Software as a Service (SaaS), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), and Platform as a Service (PaaS).
  • Least-privilege access, in which each user (this was when users were assumed to be human) only has the privileges they require.

Section 3, Modernizing Federal Government Cybersecurity

(a) To keep pace with today’s dynamic and increasingly sophisticated cyber threat environment, the Federal Government must take decisive steps to modernize its approach to cybersecurity, including by increasing the Federal Government’s visibility into threats, while protecting privacy and civil liberties. The Federal Government must adopt security best practices; advance toward Zero Trust Architecture; accelerate movement to secure cloud services, including Software as a Service (SaaS), Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), and Platform as a Service (PaaS); centralize and streamline access to cybersecurity data to drive analytics for identifying and managing cybersecurity risks; and invest in both technology and personnel to match these modernization goals.

(b) Within 60 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall…

(ii) develop a plan to implement Zero Trust Architecture, which shall incorporate, as appropriate, the migration steps that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) within the Department of Commerce has outlined in standards and guidance, describe any such steps that have already been completed, identify activities that will have the most immediate security impact, and include a schedule to implement them…

(c) As agencies continue to use cloud technology, they shall do so in a coordinated, deliberate way that allows the Federal Government to prevent, detect, assess, and remediate cyber incidents. To facilitate this approach, the migration to cloud technology shall adopt Zero Trust Architecture, as practicable. The CISA shall modernize its current cybersecurity programs, services, and capabilities to be fully functional with cloud-computing environments with Zero Trust Architecture….

(i) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security acting through the Director of CISA, and the Administrator of General Services acting through FedRAMP, shall develop a Federal cloud-security strategy and provide guidance to agencies accordingly. Such guidance shall seek to ensure that risks to the FCEB from using cloud-based services are broadly understood and effectively addressed, and that FCEB Agencies move closer to Zero Trust Architecture.

Section 10, Definitions

(k) the term “Zero Trust Architecture” means a security model, a set of system design principles, and a coordinated cybersecurity and system management strategy based on an acknowledgement that threats exist both inside and outside traditional network boundaries. The Zero Trust security model eliminates implicit trust in any one element, node, or service and instead requires continuous verification of the operational picture via real-time information from multiple sources to determine access and other system responses. In essence, a Zero Trust Architecture allows users full access but only to the bare minimum they need to perform their jobs. If a device is compromised, zero trust can ensure that the damage is contained. The Zero Trust Architecture security model assumes that a breach is inevitable or has likely already occurred, so it constantly limits access to only what is needed and looks for anomalous or malicious activity. Zero Trust Architecture embeds comprehensive security monitoring; granular risk-based access controls; and system security automation in a coordinated manner throughout all aspects of the infrastructure in order to focus on protecting data in real-time within a dynamic threat environment. This data-centric security model allows the concept of least-privileged access to be applied for every access decision, where the answers to the questions of who, what, when, where, and how are critical for appropriately allowing or denying access to resources based on the combination of sever.

The Bredemarket sales pitch

Can Bredemarket help you describe your zero trust architecture solution? If so, set up a free meeting with me to discuss your needs.

Unintended Consequences of Age Assurance…and What Happens Next (VPNs vs. Zero Trust)

More and more jurisdictions are mandating age assurance (either age verification or age estimation) to access online services. Perhaps racy content, perhaps gambling content, or in some cases even plain old social media. But in a technical sense these age assurance mechanisms are a network problem…and you can just route yourself around a problem.

Your jurisdiction doesn’t allow you to visit the Sensuous Wildebeests website? Just install a virtual private network (VPN) to pretend that you’re in a different jurisdiction that allows access.

Problem solved…for now.

But Secrets of Privacy indicates what’s next:

“After the Online Safety Act triggered a 6,000+% surge in VPN usage, the House of Lords tabled an amendment to ban children from using VPNs. Under the proposal, VPN providers would have to verify the age of all UK users. The government has said it will “look very closely” at VPN usage.”

For more information on this proposal, see TechRadar.

Google Gemini.

And this is just one of many examples of government examination, and perhaps regulation, of VPN use.

But as Secrets of Privacy points out, there’s one big problem. VPN users aren’t only kids trying to dodge the law, or individuals trying to protect their privacy. There’s one very big class of VPN users who would NOT appreciate government regulation.

“VPNs are fundamental to modern business IT, which makes a “ban” hard to envision. Every corporation with remote workers uses them. Diverse industries, such as banking, law, finance, and ecom giants all depend on VPN technology. You can’t ban VPNs without breaking the backbone of modern IT systems.”

Google Gemini.

Of course, some argue that VPNs are an outmoded security mechanism. Here’s what Fortinet says:

“VPNs were developed when networks were different than they are now. Before the advent of cloud applications, resources were isolated within a secure corporate network perimeter. Now, modern networking infrastructures are being deployed that can quickly adapt and scale to new business requirements, which means applications and data are no longer contained within the corporate data center. Instead they reside across distributed multi-cloud and hybrid data center networks.

“This change has led to a rapid expansion of the attack surface, and in the face of this changing cybersecurity environment, Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) has received more attention as an alternative to VPNs for remote access.”

Of course, VPNs will fade away at the same time the password dies…in other words, not any time soon. And while Secrets of Privacy speculates about a two-tier solution in which corporations can use VPNs but individuals cannot…we’ll see.

Do you have trust, or zero trust, that VPNs will be regulated in ALL jurisdictions in the future?

Ask questions.