Living with Trust Issues: The Human Side of Zero Trust Architecture
A Story Unfolding Across Timelines.
Current Time.
Behind the Scenes
As a consultant, I wear multiple hats, working with various clients. Some might call it a “Jill of all trades,” though most people are more familiar with the phrase "Jack of all trades." Many see great value in being a "Jill of all trades" for its versatility, adaptability, and ability to be skilled in many different areas. In contrast, others believe it leads to a lack of deep expertise in any one field.
I enjoy conversations with people who have knowledge across various aspects of life. Being an expert in one specific thing can be interesting, but it can also become boring to the people you interact with. Life is about the synergy of different elements, and those who know how to weave them intelligently are the true masters and extraordinary talents in this world.
Artificial Intelligence has become a hot topic in recent years, and concerns about its potential dangers have pushed regulators to initiate discussions to create regulations much sooner and more efficiently than they did with social media. On the one hand, people see the benefits AI can bring to the world, but on the other, they see its potential drawbacks and social risks.
As I’ve been reading about AI, people's opinions, security protocols, and various analyses while working with cybersecurity companies, I couldn’t stop wondering how security protocols in technology might impact or shape human behavior and even influence society. Unlike people who work in security agencies and may be overly protective or paranoid, computers are integrated into every aspect of our lives, making the impact on human behavior and society very real.
I wrote down some thoughts on how one of the leading IT security frameworks might affect those working in the field and their organizations, which could ultimately have an impact on society. These thoughts became an article published last month in DataDecisionMakers at VentureBeat. I invite you all to read it, especially those not working in IT and cybersecurity. Feel free to share your thoughts if something in the article resonates or helps you better understand certain behaviors in people you've worked with. You could be an external audit group within your organization and see firsthand if any of the concerns raised in the article have already surfaced.
Living with Trust Issues: The Human Side of Zero Trust Architecture
When I was a kid, grown-ups used to mock dreamers by saying they lived in the clouds. We also had a cartoon TV show with teddy bears jumping from one cloud to another, living in a dream world. I don’t know who inspired us more, but here we are today, connected to digital clouds as if they were the oxygen tube without which we can’t breathe. Inspiration is essential to innovation, but I don’t think anyone could have predicted in the 1980s or 1990s that clouds would play a significant role in our lives today and the complexity involved in ensuring their security.
The unfortunate reality is that we have become so deeply dependent on technology that any disruption to it paralyzes our lives. If any of us lose a smartphone or computer today, it feels like we have lost a vital organ of our body. Even worse, just thinking about the smallest disruption that could disconnect me from the internet or the apps on my smartphone that run on the cloud makes me feel like I can’t breathe.?
As we've become more dependent on technology, IT environments have become more complex. This has made threats more intense and could even pose a serious danger. To tackle these growing security challenges, which needed a stronger and more flexible approach, industry experts, security practitioners, and tech providers came together to develop the Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) framework. This development led to a growing recognition of the importance of prioritizing verification over trust, which made ZTA a cornerstone of modern cybersecurity strategies.
The main idea behind ZTA is to "never trust, always verify." This approach is quite different from the traditional security models that rely on security tools such as firewalls. Instead of assuming that everything inside the network is safe, ZTA looks at every user, device, and application with a bit of suspicion until it can confirm they’re legitimate. By constantly keeping an eye on and checking every access request, ZTA helps cut down the risk of data breaches.
The Danger?
Implementing the ZTA framework means that every action the IT and security teams handle is filtered through a security-first lens. However, the over-repeated mantra of "never trust, always verify" may affect the psychological well-being of those implementing it.?
领英推荐
Imagine spending hours monitoring every network activity while constantly questioning if the information is genuine and if people's motives are pure. This suspicious climate not only affects the work environment but also spills over into personal interactions, affecting trust with others. As the line between professional and personal life blurs, the psychological burden can extend beyond the workplace into personal relationships with partners, family, and friends.
The Psychological Toll
The paradox is that companies’ goal is to grow and sell in international markets, but on the other hand, the “never trust, always verify” mindset sets blockers when people become too suspicious. So, what is the impact on employees when developing new relationships with business partners or prospects? How does doubt affect building trust with foreign cultures??
When organizations don't pay attention to the effects of constant skepticism at work, employees and society face consequences.?
When technology becomes the primary source of living for more and more people, this mindset becomes common in society. In this scenario, the main question is how “never trust, always verify” affects the development of our society. ZTA and other security protocols are essential, and they must stay; however, we cannot ignore their impact on the mental behavior of people working in this field. In practice, developing solutions for technology threats creates dangerous implications on people’s behavior and their mental health.
Could “never trust, always verify” lead to collective paranoid behaviors in our society? Who is equipped to answer this question? Who can assess the consequences for society? Not only have the Internet and social networks isolated younger generations and impacted their ability to form in-person relationships, but now one of the leading protocol mottos during their workweek is “never trust.”
Can We Fall In Love Without Trust?
Maybe I’m overthinking it, but I can't stop wondering how these contradictions impact our lives. On the one hand, personal relationships are essential to our existence, and we have been learning how to build them since infancy. On the other hand, social networks have isolated teenagers and young adults, and their current or future employment options in tech include repeating daily mottos that question the trust of the human behavior of users. Are we setting people up for a life of irreconcilable conflicts?
The absurdity is that technology has brought us closer while pushing us further apart. Do we even know how to redefine trust and relationships as we stand at the dawn of the AI era?
Please fasten your seatbelts and subscribe.
Unlock my potential to write the next great chapter in the most extraordinary story ever told. Your support on Substack or Patreon would make a big difference in taking this journey to the next level.
Follow me on My Journey to Infinity to find out. It will be more beautiful than you could ever imagine.
Liat
Network Security Engineer at IBM | F5-CSE Security | PCNSE | Security+ | CCNA | LPI LE-1
6 个月I think cybersec pros should consciously control that. They, we, should leave their work behavior at work, and be normal people at home. Cybersec job in that part, is not different than any defense job that people have been doing for centuries, such as being a soldier, or law enforcement professional. At work, military and police personnel defend one group of people from another malicious group of people. I think each cybersec individual should work on controlling the mindset and behavior and separate their professional life from their beloved ones and personal life. My opinion is that Cybersec pros can be mindful about that and be aware when too much caution is too much.
Senior Meteorologist at Delta Air Lines. Artist in acrylic and oil paintings. Open to commission artwork. Professional connections only. No crypto/NFTs/asking for donations. Comments/likes are my own.
6 个月May or may not be completely related, but today as I walked from the building I work at to the building where the cafeteria is, I noted what other people were doing as they also walked between the buildings, as well as in the cafeteria. Most of those between the buildings had their heads down looking at their phone. I think one person was fumbling with TWO phones! In the crowded cafeteria, people walk quickly to get their food or bring their food to where they are going. Most are paying attention to where they are walking, but one gentleman was looking down at his phone, oblivious to those around him and whether he would run someone over. Indeed the more tech we have, the more we are driving apart.