Zero trust security architecture: Replacing the old perimeter model
Discover how replacing perimeter defenses with a canal-based Zero Trust model gives you granular control over every access request while strengthening security through continuous verification and microperimeters.
Goodbye Moat-and-Castle, Hello Canal-Based Control
For decades, cybersecurity has relied on a mental model rooted in medieval defense: the castle and moat. Build high walls, guard the gates, and trust everything inside. It worked well enough when organizations had clearly defined perimeters, centralized infrastructure, and employees working on-site.
But today, those assumptions no longer hold. The perimeter is gone. Cloud services, remote work, APIs, third-party integrations, and machine identities have dissolved the walls—and the moat isn’t keeping anything out. In this new reality, Zero Trust has emerged not as a toolset, but as a strategic model for how access should be granted and governed.
To truly understand and implement Zero Trust, we need to move beyond the castle-and-moat analogy. A better metaphor for today’s dynamic environment is the canal.
The Zero Trust Canal: Controlled Flow Instead of Fortified Walls
In a Zero Trust world, access is no longer binary nor is it granted just based on location or implicit status. It’s earned, calculated, and continuously re-evaluated. A canal is a perfect analogy for how access should work: It’s a controlled journey akin to a ship navigating a canal system. The S.S. Access (an individual access request) must pass through a series of locks that verify trust conditions before reaching its destination: the protect surface (the resource).
A canal is a powerful metaphor for Zero Trust because:
It’s engineered for controlled movement
It uses locks to regulate and verify flow
It segments pathways to prevent uncontrolled spread
Just like a canal, Zero Trust is about deliberate, policy-driven movement where access request is guided through a series of checkpoints, each enforcing its own set of rules.
The Primary Locks of Zero Trust
Access requests must pass through a sequence of five primary locks. Each one is independently enforced and may contain multiple locking bolts, which are specific policy controls enforced through microperimeters.
Identity: Is the user, device, or service authenticated and authorized right now? Controls include biometrics, passkeys, roles, UEBA, and just-in-time access.
Network: Is the request coming from a trusted network segment? Enforced through segmentation, ZTNA, geo-filtering, and anomaly detection.
Device: Is the device secure and compliant? Checks include OS version, patches, encryption, and telemetry.
Application: Is the app or service behaving as expected and authorized for this interaction?
Data: What is being accessed, and what protections apply? Evaluates sensitivity, encryption, classification, and access policies.
Each lock can adapt in real time, triggering additional requirements such as multi-factor authentication (MFA), session isolation, reduced access scope, or full access revocation based on risk signals, user behavior, or policy changes.
Why This Model Works
Aspect
Castle & Moat
Canal & Locks
Philosophy
Keep threats out
Continuously verify trust at each stage
Architecture
Static perimeter
Dynamic, layered trust microperimeters
Trust Assumptions
Everything inside the castle is trusted
Trust nothing by default
Blast Radius
Broad lateral movement if breached
Contained through segmented microperimeters
Enforcement Location
Perimeter firewall
Inline, context-aware microperimeters
Decision Drivers
Static rules and VPN access
Real-time context from Identity, network, device, app, and data pillars.
Microperimeters: Turning the Locks into Action
While the canal metaphor helps conceptualize the flow of access, microperimeters operationalize the locks. They are the enforcement boundaries that wrap around every sensitive asset or interaction.
Instead of relying on a single, monolithic perimeter, Zero Trust distributes enforcement to the edges of every access point. Whether it’s a device accessing a cloud resource, a microservice talking to another, or a user initiating an API call—each of these moments is surrounded by its own microperimeter, where context is evaluated and policy is applied.
These microperimeters allow for granular control and dynamic response. They enable organizations to move beyond static segmentation and build transaction-level access governance without relying on a rigid infrastructure model. In Zero Trust, trust is ephemeral, access is conditional, and enforcement is everywhere.
The Traditional Perimeter is Gone. Trust Must Flow.
The era of fixed perimeters is over. Today, every identity is potentially external. Every access decision is a potential breach point. And every application, API, and dataset is a potential target.
Zero Trust is not about blocking access. It’s about continuously granting access intentionally.
Build a system of canals, not walls. Raise locks, not gates. Let the S.S. Access travel securely—always evaluated, never assumed, never trusted.