What are the differences between Zero Trust and traditional firewall approaches?

Zero trust differs from traditional firewalls in securing modern network environments in the following ways:
1. Authentication: Zero trust focuses on strict identity verification for every user and device trying to access the network, whereas traditional firewalls typically rely on pre-defined rules based on IP addresses and port numbers.

2. Perimeter-based vs. Identity-driven: Traditional firewalls operate on a perimeter-based security model, whereas zero trust operates on an identity-driven model, assuming that threats exist inside and outside the network.

3. Continuous monitoring: Zero trust involves continuous monitoring and verification of user and device behavior, as opposed to the static rules of traditional firewalls.

4. Micro-segmentation: Zero trust implements micro-segmentation, dividing the network into smaller, more manageable segments with restricted access controls, while traditional firewalls often work at the network perimeter level.

5. Access control: Zero trust applies a least-privilege access approach, allowing users or devices to access only the resources they specifically need, whereas traditional firewalls may have broader access permissions.

6. Context-aware security: Zero trust considers contextual factors such as the user’s location, device status, and behavior, to make access decisions, which goes beyond the capabilities of traditional firewalls.

These differences highlight how zero trust approaches security in a more dynamic, adaptive, and user-centric manner compared to the more static, perimeter-focused nature of traditional firewalls.