Comment by kennethallen

8 hours ago

I don't understand the use case here. Is this supposed to be for enterprise to control access to internal applications via network access policies?

Yes. The acronym is “ZTNA” (Zero Trust Network Access).

It is an alternative to a traditional corporate VPN that addresses a few architectural issues; namely:

- L3 connectivity (which allows for lateral movement) to the corporate network. - Inbound exposure to the VPN gateway (scaling can become a challenge, not to mention continuous vulnerabilities from… certain vendors) - Policy management can get convoluted if you want to do micro-segmentation properly.

ZTNA is essentially an “inside-out” architecture and acts (kind of) like a L4 proxy. I’m going to butcher this explanation, but:

1. Company installs apps/VMs/containers throughout their network. These must have network reachability to the internal apps/services the company wants to make available to its users.

2. These apps/VMs/containers establish TLS tunnels back to the company’s tenant in the vendor’s cloud.

3. Company rolls out the vendor’s ZTNA client to user devices. This also establishes a TLS tunnel to the vendor’s cloud. Hence the vendor’s cloud is like a MitM gatekeeper.

4. Company creates policies in the vendor’s cloud that says “User A can access App X via app/VM/container Z”

5. Even if App X is on the same LAN segment as App Y, App Y is invisible to User A because connectivity to the internal apps happens at L4.

It is an interesting architecture. That being said, ZTNA solutions have their own issues as well (you can probably already spot some based on my explanation above!)

(Note: I worked for a security vendor that sold a ZTNA solution as part of their ~4-5 years ago. Things could be different now.)