3 ms·
> Backups are also very expensive, whereas zero trust is cheap. Could you elaborate on this? I would have thought that they are at least in the same ball-park.
by chopin 5y ago
> Backups are also very expensive, whereas zero trust is cheap.
Could you elaborate on this? I would have thought that they are at least in the same ball-park. I work at a large software company and we have a lot of internal systems one has access to. You have to harden your AD, you have to be very careful with single-sign on, etc. I'd bet, if I could compromise the machine of one of our employees I could do a lot of lateral movement. You must not only harden the production machine, you need to harden everything in the supply chain for those machines.
- staticassertion 5y agoI'm making a big assumption, which is that the company is young and starting to think about security. I'm not sure what you want me to elaborate on though. Backups have a very literal cost - storage, maintenance, etc. Zero trust is just a paradigm, it's no more expensive than any other approach, it's just an architectural choice. I don't think compromising our machines would be easy, nor do I Think lateral movement would be easy, but there's still more that we can do.