Zero Trust and Secure Access platforms control access to applications and services by verified identity, device condition, location, context, and risk, rather than trusting network position alone.
The platform you choose determines how precisely you can enforce least-privilege access, support remote users and third parties, and whether policy changes, posture checks, and session controls are handled centrally or through workarounds.
As a partner to vendors including HPE, Cisco, Juniper, and Fortinet, we specify Zero Trust and Secure Access against your requirements, so you're not overcommitted on licensing and features you will not use or short on coverage for the users, devices, and applications you need to secure.
Modern Zero Trust and secure access platforms are built to handle the demands placed on hybrid access, from identity and device trust to least-privilege control and continuous verification.
Access decisions are based on verified identity, device condition, application context, and risk rather than relying only on where a user connects from.
Zero trust access gives remote users controlled access to approved applications without exposing the wider corporate network through traditional VPN connections.
Least-privilege policies restrict users to the specific systems and services they need, with trust reassessed throughout each session.
Device profiling, posture checks, and policy enforcement help prevent unmanaged or non-compliant devices from reaching sensitive network resources.
Application-level access controls reduce exposure by keeping internal services hidden from users and devices that have not been explicitly authorised.
Central policy, identity integration, and consistent access logs help security teams manage permissions and investigate access activity more efficiently.
Zero Trust & Secure Access adapts to different environments, each with distinct users, applications, risk levels, and control requirements.
Identity-aware access applies consistent policy across wired, wireless, and applications without automatically trusting internal users or devices.
Consistent access controls across branches, offices, data centres, and cloud services reduce policy drift and simplify oversight.
Application-specific access for office, home, and mobile users limits unnecessary network exposure while supporting flexible working securely.
Least-privilege access and continuous verification protect internal applications and privileged systems, helping reduce lateral movement after compromise.
Detailed access control, session visibility, and audit records protect sensitive systems while supporting governance and compliance requirements.
Identity-aware policy secures SaaS, cloud consoles, hosted applications, and workloads with consistent controls beyond the traditional perimeter.
Getting these areas right helps avoid excessive access, identity gaps, unsupported applications, weak device controls and unnecessary user friction.
Confirm identity sources, authentication methods and account governance so access decisions are based on reliable user and role information.
Validate device discovery, posture assessment and enforcement options so unmanaged or non-compliant devices cannot reach sensitive resources.
Define least-privilege policies, trust signals and continuous verification so access remains limited to approved users, devices and applications.
Map remote users, third parties and application requirements so zero trust access can replace broad VPN connectivity without disrupting work.
Identify audit, retention and access-control obligations so policies and activity records support governance and regulatory evidence.
Confirm integration with identity, endpoint, network and security tools so access decisions use consistent context across the environment.
Both approaches control access, but they decide trust differently. Comparing user location, device ownership and the level of access required helps teams determine where perimeter security is enough and where zero-trust controls are needed as an additional layer.
| Zero Trust & Secure Access | Traditional Perimeter Security | |
|---|---|---|
| Trust model | Checks identity, device condition and context before granting access to a specific application or resource | Places greater trust in users and devices once they have entered a protected network |
| Best-fit access | Remote, hybrid, contractor and third-party access to cloud or internal applications | Managed users and devices working mainly from known offices, campuses or internal networks |
| Access scope | Limits each user to the application or resource they need and can reassess access when conditions change | Controls entry to network areas, where approved users may reach a wider group of internal resources |
| Management model | Uses identity, device and application information to apply access rules across locations | Uses firewalls, VPNs and network segmentation to control access around trusted network boundaries |
| What it is not built for | Replacing firewalls, segmentation and other network security controls required across the wider environment | Granular application access for distributed users, unmanaged devices and changing risk without adding identity-led controls |
The right secure-access vendor depends on the mix of users and devices, the existing network and security estate, and how much policy depth, endpoint context, and operational simplicity teams require.
Best for: Fortinet environments that need identity services, endpoint posture, and network admission controls for unmanaged, IoT, and operational devices across the estate.
Why this vendor
Best for: Juniper Mist customers that want cloud-native access control without deploying, upgrading, and maintaining traditional on-premises NAC appliances across campus environments.
Why this vendor
Best for: Cisco environments that want coordinated identity verification, network admission, endpoint connectivity, and web protection rather than relying on a single-purpose access product.
Why this vendor
Best for: Complex multi-vendor campuses that need detailed access control, endpoint profiling, and flexible guest, contractor, or BYOD onboarding across different network domains.
Why this vendor
Get a clear recommendation for your network
Unsure which software is the right fit for your requirements? Our specialists can assess your workloads, existing estate, growth plans, and operational requirements, then recommend the right approach.
We’re trusted by IT teams in enterprise environments, campuses and distributed workforces. Our role is to help you make the right platform decisions for zero trust and secure access, with practical support across HPE Aruba, Cisco and Juniper.
Zero Trust & Secure Access Services
From architecture and deployment to optimisation and modernisation, we help you control access using identity, device trust and application context rather than network location alone.
We help you compare suitable platforms across HPE Aruba, Cisco and Juniper — balancing identity coverage, device checks, enforcement and total cost.
We assess your infrastructure, APIs, data sources and workflows to ensure software is compatible.
Maximise value from existing equipment and refresh with ease.
Need help with zero trust and secure access?
Speak to our experts about selecting, deploying or optimising zero trust and secure access platforms.
If you're planning zero trust and secure access, these categories cover the surrounding SASE, security management, analytics and network automation layers needed to enforce policy consistently.
Software for configuring, monitoring, and automating network operations across campus, data centre, WAN, and cloud-connected environments.
Browse platformsSIEM, XDR, and security analytics platforms that correlate activity across multiple controls to improve threat detection, investigation, and response.
Browse platformsCentralised platforms for managing security policy, configuration, events, compliance, and operational workflows across multiple security controls.
Browse platformsCloud-delivered networking and security platforms that combine secure access, policy enforcement, and WAN connectivity for users, sites, and applications.
Browse platformsZero Trust & Secure Access relies on coordinated identity, network security, edge connectivity, and policy enforcement across environments.
The solutions below help extend controlled access across users, devices, applications, and locations more securely and consistently.
Security architectures that enforce segmentation, threat prevention, and consistent policy across on-premises and cloud environments.
Explore Network Security ›WAN and edge architectures improve branch connectivity, resilience, application performance, and centralised control across distributed sites.
Explore WAN And Edge Networking ›Centralised management and automation help apply network changes consistently, reduce manual effort, and improve visibility.
Explore Cloud And Network Management ›Choose by matching users, devices, applications, network access, identity sources, posture checks, segmentation, deployment model, integrations, and enforcement locations.
Separate workplace network access control from remote application access, then define identity and posture requirements for employees, contractors, guests, unmanaged devices and IoT. The policy model must be practical to operate and audit, with resilience for sites affected by WAN or cloud disruption. Use the platform comparison to assess access scope, policy model, identity, posture, enforcement, and estate fit.
The platforms differ in NAC architecture, cloud delivery, network integration, device profiling, segmentation, ZTNA, endpoint telemetry, and multivendor support.
HPE Aruba Networking ClearPass focuses on multivendor NAC and onboarding, Cisco Identity Services Engine on policy, profiling and segmentation, Juniper Mist Access Assurance on cloud-native NAC with site survivability, and Fortinet on linking NAC, telemetry and ZTNA. Use the vendor comparison to compare HPE, Cisco, Juniper, and Fortinet by NAC, ZTNA, identity, and network integration.
It can automate appropriate access and reduce lateral movement, but policy design, endpoint readiness, exception handling, and user communication determine operational success.
Identity and device context can place users and endpoints into the correct role without relying on static VLANs, improving segmentation and responsiveness. However, certificate deployment, guest onboarding, legacy exceptions and weak diagnostics can increase service desk demand unless policies are tested and enforced in stages.
It can replace some broad VPN and static access models, but legacy protocols, unmanaged devices, site access, and emergency workflows may require coexistence.
ZTNA suits application-specific remote access, while NAC still matters for devices connecting to wired and wireless networks and for controlled administrative access. Older applications and operational systems may still need VPN during transition, so dependencies and break-glass procedures should be defined before cutover.
Yes, mixed-vendor access can work when identity attributes, device posture, RADIUS or TACACS flows, policy ownership, enforcement, and logging are aligned.
Assessments should confirm protocol support, available policy attributes, posture update timing, and how policies behave across each hardware family. Logging also needs to preserve user, device, policy and enforcement context so faults can be traced across identity, access control, routing and security. For NAC, ZTNA, identity integration, or phased access-policy deployment, speak to our secure access experts before enforcing the design.
Specify identity sources, MFA, certificates, posture signals, device profiling, access protocols, policy scale, local survivability, audit logging, APIs, and high availability.
Document authentication methods such as 802.1X, MAB, RADIUS, TACACS+, SAML, OIDC and certificate-based access, then confirm how posture signals are collected and updated. Resilience should cover redundant policy nodes, local authentication, identity-provider outages and searchable audit logs with governance and API support.
