1. Executive Summary
The modern enterprise has transcended physical boundaries. The monolithic perimeter that once defined corporate security has dissolved, replaced by a complex, hybrid ecosystem where on-premises legacy infrastructure operates in tandem with public cloud services, edge computing, and dispersed remote workforces. This hybrid reality offers unparalleled agility and scalability, yet it introduces a fractured attack surface where traditional security paradigms are not merely inefficient—they are dangerously obsolete. Guaranteeing cybersecurity in this environment requires a fundamental architectural shift from static, perimeter-based defenses to a dynamic, identity-centric Zero Trust model, underpinned by rigorous governance and unified observability.
This report provides an exhaustive analysis of the strategies, technical controls, and operational frameworks necessary to secure a hybrid environment. It moves beyond high-level advice to offer granular implementation scenarios, specifically addressing the integration of legacy systems, the mechanics of secure cloud bursting, managing third-party risks, and securing a hybrid workforce. By synthesizing guidance from NIST, CIS, and the Cloud Security Alliance, alongside real-world breach analysis and technical comparisons of leading tooling (Azure Arc vs. AWS Systems Manager), this document serves as a definitive baseline for architects and CISOs.
The analysis reveals that the greatest risks in hybrid environments do not stem from the cloud providers themselves, but from the interstitial spaces—the synchronization gaps between on-premises directories and cloud identity providers, the unencrypted transit of data across hybrid interconnects, and the inconsistent application of policy across disparate environments. Addressing these requires a holistic strategy that treats identity as the new perimeter, enforces "Policy as Code" across the entire estate, and maintains rigorous data integrity verification during migration and operation.
2. The Hybrid Security Paradox: Evolution of the Threat Landscape
The transition to hybrid cloud is not simply a change in infrastructure; it is a transformation of risk. In a purely on-premises environment, the organization controls every layer of the stack, from the physical locks on server racks to the application code. In a hybrid model, this control is fragmented. The "Hybrid Security Paradox" lies in the fact that while public clouds often offer superior native security capabilities compared to average on-premises data centers, the complexity of connecting these two worlds creates new, often overlooked vulnerabilities.
2.1 The Dissolution of the Perimeter
Traditionally, security relied on a "castle-and-moat" architecture. Firewalls guarded the entry points, and trust was implicit for anyone inside the network. In a hybrid environment, the castle is connected to the cloud via high-speed tunnels (Direct Connect, ExpressRoute, VPNs), effectively creating a backdoor that bypasses the moat. Workloads move dynamically between secure on-premises zones and public cloud environments, carrying data across untrusted networks.
The threat landscape has evolved to exploit this fluidity. Attackers no longer need to breach the main firewall; they can target a less secure cloud development instance, pivot through the hybrid interconnect, and reach the on-premises core. This lateral movement is facilitated by flat network architectures and implicit trust models that persist in legacy setups. Furthermore, the rise of "Shadow IT"—where business units adopt SaaS solutions without IT oversight—expands the attack surface beyond the visibility of the security team.
2.2 The Complexity of Split-Brain Visibility
A defining characteristic of hybrid failure is "split-brain" visibility. On-premises infrastructure is monitored via legacy tools (e.g., SolarWinds, local SIEMs), while cloud resources generate logs in cloud-native formats (e.g., AWS CloudWatch, Azure Monitor). Correlating an event that begins with a phishing email on an on-premises workstation and ends with data exfiltration from an S3 bucket is notoriously difficult without a unified observability strategy. This visibility gap allows "low and slow" attacks to persist undetected, as the indicators of compromise (IoCs) are scattered across disconnected logging systems.
3. Governance Frameworks and the Shared Responsibility Model
Establishing a secure hybrid environment begins not with technology, but with governance. The ambiguity of responsibility is the primary adversary in cloud adoption.
3.1 The Multi-Dimensional Shared Responsibility Model
The shared responsibility model dictates that security obligations are divided between the provider and the customer. In a hybrid context, this model becomes multi-dimensional and variable.
On-Premises: The customer bears 100% responsibility for physical security, host infrastructure, network controls, application security, and identity and access management (IAM).
IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service): The provider secures the physical data center, network backbone, and hypervisor. The customer must secure the guest OS, configure firewalls (Security Groups), manage data encryption, and govern identity.
PaaS (Platform as a Service): The provider manages the OS and runtime. The customer focuses on data security and identity.
SaaS (Software as a Service): The provider manages the full stack. The customer is responsible solely for data governance and identity management.
A critical failure point in hybrid security is the "assumption of inheritance," where organizations mistakenly believe that the robust physical security of the cloud provider automatically extends to the logical security of their hybrid connections. For instance, while AWS secures its data centers, it does not secure the VPN tunnel connecting a customer's on-premises office to a VPC. Understanding these delineations is critical for compliance with frameworks like PCI-DSS, HIPAA, and GDPR.
3.2 NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 in Hybrid Contexts
The NIST CSF provides a taxonomy—Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover—that must be adapted for hybrid complexities. The release of CSF 2.0 emphasizes governance and supply chain risk management, crucial for hybrid setups involving third-party vendors.
3.2.1 Identify: Dynamic Asset Inventory
In a hybrid cloud, asset inventory cannot be static. Virtual machines (VMs) and containers spin up and down automatically in response to load (cloud bursting). A static Excel spreadsheet of servers is obsolete the moment it is saved.
Requirement: Organizations must employ automated discovery tools that query APIs across all cloud providers (AWS, Azure, GCP) and on-premises hypervisors (VMware vCenter) to maintain a real-time Configuration Management Database (CMDB).
Implementation: Use tools that map dependencies. Knowing a server exists is insufficient; you must know that Web-Server-01 in Azure relies on Database-Server-02 on-premises to process transactions. This context is vital for risk assessment and incident response.
3.2.2 Protect: Harmonizing Controls
Security controls must be consistent, regardless of location.
Access Control: Apply the principle of Least Privilege universally. A common gap is enforcing rigorous IAM roles on-premises while leaving cloud IAM roles overly permissive (e.g., AdministratorAccess).
Data Security: Implement uniform encryption standards. If on-premises data uses AES-256, cloud storage buckets must enforce the same.
Maintenance: Patch management must extend to the cloud. While PaaS handles some patching, IaaS instances require the same rigorous update cycles as physical servers.
3.2.3 Detect: Unified Telemetry
Detection requires aggregating disparate log streams.
Strategy: Implement a "Hybrid SIEM" architecture. Forward on-premises logs and cloud logs (CloudTrail, Azure Activity Logs) to a centralized data lake or SIEM (e.g., Splunk, Microsoft Sentinel).
Use Case: Detect a "Golden SAML" attack where a compromised on-premises AD Federation Services (AD FS) server is used to forge authentication tokens for cloud access. This detection requires correlating on-premises AD logs with cloud login events.
3.2.4 Respond & Recover: Integrated Playbooks
Incident Response Plans (IRPs) must account for the distributed nature of hybrid data.
Response: If a ransomware infection is detected on an Azure VM, the automated response must include isolating the hybrid network link (VPN/ExpressRoute) to prevent spread to the on-premises data center.
Recover: Backup strategies must be hybrid-aware. Ensure that cloud backups are immutable (WORM storage) to protect against ransomware that attempts to encrypt backups. Test restoration paths: can you restore an on-premises server to the cloud if the physical data center is inaccessible?.
3.3 CIS Critical Security Controls (v8) for Hybrid
The CIS Controls v8 have been updated to specifically address cloud and hybrid environments, organizing controls into Implementation Groups (IGs) based on organizational maturity.
Key Hybrid-Specific Controls:
Control 3 (Data Protection): Focuses on encryption and data lifecycle. In hybrid, this emphasizes encrypting data in transit over public networks (VPN/TLS) and managing keys securely (BYOK).
Control 4 (Secure Configuration): Mandates establishing secure baselines. Organizations should apply CIS Benchmarks to both on-premises operating systems and cloud provider configurations. A common oversight is hardening the OS but leaving the cloud control plane (e.g., S3 bucket policies) default.
Control 15 (Service Provider Management): Critical for hybrid, this control governs the security of third-party cloud providers and SaaS applications. It requires cataloging providers, assessing their security posture, and monitoring their compliance.
4. Identity: The New Security Perimeter
In a hybrid environment where the network perimeter is porous, identity becomes the primary control plane. The philosophy of "Identity is the new perimeter" dictates that trust is never assumed based on network location; it must be explicitly verified for every access request.
4.1 The Risks of Hybrid Identity Synchronization
Most hybrid organizations rely on synchronizing their on-premises Active Directory (AD) to a cloud Identity Provider (IdP) like Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD). This synchronization bridge is a critical vulnerability.
Latency Gaps: Synchronization is not instantaneous. If an employee is terminated and their on-premises account is disabled, but the sync cycle takes 30 minutes, they retain access to cloud resources for that duration. This "termination gap" is a prime window for data exfiltration.
Mitigation: Implement "delta sync" cycles that run frequently (e.g., every 2 minutes) or use "pass-through authentication" where the cloud IdP validates credentials directly against the on-premises AD in real-time, eliminating the sync delay risk.
Privilege Escalation: Administrators often use the same accounts for on-premises and cloud administration. If an on-premises domain admin account is compromised via a phishing attack, the attacker can laterally move to the cloud if that account is synced with high privileges.
Mitigation: Separate administrative accounts. Use "cloud-only" accounts for cloud administration that are not synced from on-premises AD. This creates an "air gap" for identity privileges.
4.2 Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) and Conditional Access
MFA is non-negotiable, but in a hybrid environment, context is king. Static MFA (username + password + OTP) is insufficient against sophisticated attacks like token theft or prompt bombing. Conditional Access Policies allow for dynamic, risk-based access control. Policies evaluate multiple signals before granting access:
User Risk: Is the user's password compromised on the dark web?
Sign-in Risk: Is the login coming from an anonymous IP, a Tor exit node, or an impossible travel location?
Device Compliance: Is the device managed (MDM), encrypted, and compliant with patch policies?
Application Sensitivity: Is the user accessing a high-risk financial app or a low-risk cafeteria menu?
Active Scenario: A user attempts to access the corporate ERP (hosted on-premises, exposed via hybrid proxy).
Policy Check: The Conditional Access engine sees the request.
Context: The user is in a new country and using an unmanaged personal laptop.
Enforcement: The policy blocks the access attempt before the user can even try to authenticate, or requires a phishing-resistant MFA (e.g., FIDO2 key) and forces a password reset.
4.3 Privileged Access Management (PAM) and Just-In-Time (JIT)
Standing privileges—where an admin has permanent "super-user" rights—are a massive liability. Zero Standing Privileges (ZSP): The goal is to have zero administrators with permanent access. Just-In-Time (JIT) Workflow:
Request: An admin needs to patch a production server. They request access via a PAM portal.
Approval: The request is validated against policy (e.g., is there an active change ticket?).
Provisioning: The PAM system dynamically adds the user to the "Administrators" group or issues a short-lived certificate.
Access: The user performs the task.
Revocation: After the time window (e.g., 2 hours) expires, the system automatically removes the user from the group. This minimizes the "blast radius." Even if the admin's credentials are stolen, they are useless without the JIT approval workflow.
5. Network Architecture: From VPN to Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)
Legacy Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) were designed for a different era. They operate on a "castle-and-moat" philosophy: once a user tunnels through the VPN, they often have broad network-level access. In a hybrid world, this creates massive lateral movement opportunities.
5.1 The VPN vs. ZTNA Paradigm Shift
Feature Legacy VPN Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)
Access Scope Network-Centric (Layer 3): Grants access to entire subnets. Once inside, users can often scan and reach other assets. Application-Centric (Layer 7): Grants access only to specific applications. The underlying network remains invisible to the user.
Trust Model Implicit Trust: "Connect, then authenticate." The device is trusted once the tunnel is established. Continuous Verification: "Authenticate, then connect." Trust is never assumed; every request is verified for identity and context.
Visibility Opaque: Limited visibility into user activity inside the tunnel. Difficult to audit specific application usage. Granular: Full visibility into every application request, session duration, and data transfer.
Performance Hair-pinning: Traffic is often backhauled through a central concentrator, increasing latency and bandwidth costs. Direct Access: Users connect directly to the application (cloud or on-prem) via the nearest ZTNA broker (edge), improving performance.
Attack Surface Exposed: VPN concentrators listen on public IP addresses, making them targets for DDoS and vulnerability exploitation. Dark: Applications are hidden behind outbound-only connections to the broker. No public inbound ports are open.
Source:
5.2 Split Tunneling: Risks and Secure Configuration
In hybrid scenarios, "split tunneling" is often enabled to improve performance. This allows a user to access corporate resources via the VPN tunnel while accessing the public internet (e.g., YouTube, Zoom) directly through their local ISP.
The Risk: An attacker could compromise the user's device via the unsecured "direct" internet connection (e.g., drive-by download). Once compromised, the device acts as a bridge, allowing the attacker to pivot through the active VPN tunnel into the corporate network.
Secure Implementation Baseline:
Endpoint Hardening: Split tunneling should only be enabled on fully managed devices with active EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) and DNS filtering agents (e.g., Cisco Umbrella, Zscaler) that secure the "direct" internet traffic.
CASB Integration: Use a Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) agent to monitor and enforce policy on the direct internet traffic, preventing data exfiltration to personal cloud storage.
Micro-segmentation: Even if traffic comes through the VPN, the destination network should be micro-segmented. The VPN user should land in a "quarantine" zone with restricted firewall rules, not the flat data center network.
5.3 Micro-segmentation Strategy
Micro-segmentation divides the data center and cloud environments into granular zones, often down to the individual workload.
East-West Traffic Control: Traditional firewalls inspect North-South traffic (entering/leaving the data center). Micro-segmentation inspects East-West traffic (server-to-server).
Implementation: Use software-defined networking (SDN) or host-based firewalls (e.g., iptables managed by an agent) to enforce policies like: "The Web Server can talk to the App Server on port 443, but cannot talk to the Database Server directly."
Zero Trust Alignment: This ensures that if a web server is breached, the attacker cannot laterally move to the database or other systems.
6. Data Security and Sovereignty in a Borderless World
Data in a hybrid environment is fluid, moving between on-premises storage, cloud object stores, and SaaS applications. Maintaining integrity, confidentiality, and sovereignty is paramount.
6.1 Data Encryption Strategy
Data in Transit: All traffic—whether North-South (client to server) or East-West (server to server)—must be encrypted using TLS 1.2 or higher. This is critical for hybrid interconnects (VPN, Direct Connect) where data traverses third-party infrastructure.
Data at Rest: Use "envelope encryption." Data is encrypted with a Data Encryption Key (DEK), which is then encrypted with a Key Encryption Key (KEK).
Key Management (BYOK/HYOK): For highly sensitive data, rely on Bring Your Own Key (BYOK) or Hold Your Own Key (HYOK). In these models, the KEK is generated and managed in an on-premises Hardware Security Module (HSM) and selectively shared with the cloud provider. This ensures that the cloud provider cannot decrypt the data without the customer's explicit permission (and the key can be revoked unilaterally).
6.2 Data Residency and Compliance
Hybrid architectures are often driven by data sovereignty laws (GDPR, CCPA, localized banking regulations) which mandate that certain data types must remain within national borders.
Geofencing: Cloud resources must be configured to strictly prevent data replication to prohibited regions. For example, an Azure Storage Account in "Germany West Central" should have geo-replication disabled or restricted to other German regions.
Discovery & Classification: Use automated Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) tools to scan and classify data. If PII is detected in a U.S. cloud bucket that originated from EU customers, an alert should trigger.
Hybrid Architecture for Sovereignty: Keep the "system of record" (database) on-premises or in a sovereign cloud region, while allowing stateless compute workloads to burst into the public cloud for processing (processing data in memory without persistent storage).
6.3 Data Integrity and Migration Validation
Migrating data to the cloud is a high-risk phase where corruption or tampering can occur.
Pre-Migration: Perform data profiling to identify anomalies (nulls, format errors) before transfer. Generate cryptographic hashes (SHA-256) of data batches.
During Transfer: Use secure, validated transfer protocols. Cloud native migration services (e.g., AWS DataSync, Azure Data Box) handle checksum validation automatically.
Post-Migration: Perform "row count" verification and "sample data" validation. Re-calculate hashes on the destination and match them against the source. For databases, ensure atomic transactions were preserved. Tools like Tencent Cloud DTS or custom validation scripts are essential here.
7. Unified Observability and Operational Excellence
You cannot protect what you cannot see. The "black box" problem is exacerbated in hybrid environments where tools are often siloed.
7.1 Unified Observability Architectures
Best practice dictates the use of unified observability platforms (e.g., Datadog, Splunk, Dynatrace) that ingest metrics, traces, and logs from both on-premises and cloud sources into a "single pane of glass."
Correlation: Security teams must be able to correlate a firewall drop on an on-premises Cisco ASA with a failed login attempt on an AWS IAM role. This requires a normalized data schema (e.g., OCSF - Open Cybersecurity Schema Framework).
Key Metrics: Monitor for "impossible travel" (identity), outbound traffic to known C2 IPs (network), and changes to security groups (configuration).
Traceability: Distributed tracing (e.g., OpenTelemetry) helps track a user request as it traverses from an on-premises load balancer through a hybrid tunnel to a cloud microservice. This is vital for debugging performance and security incidents.
7.2 Operational Tooling: Patch Management and Policy as Code
Managing patches and configuration across a hybrid fleet requires unified tooling.
Patch Management:
Azure Arc / Azure Update Manager: Installs a connected machine agent on on-premises Windows/Linux servers. It treats them as Azure resources, allowing you to use Azure's update management scheduler to patch on-premises servers alongside Azure VMs.
AWS Systems Manager (SSM): Uses the SSM Agent installed on hybrid servers. Allows for automated patching (Patch Manager), inventory collection, and secure shell access (Session Manager) without opening inbound ports.
Policy as Code (Governance):
Azure Policy: Can audit and enforce OS-level settings (e.g., password complexity, registry keys) on Arc-enabled servers. It acts as a cloud-native Group Policy Object (GPO).
AWS Config: Monitors configuration history and compliance. Can trigger remediation actions via SSM documents (e.g., if an S3 bucket is public, automatically run a script to make it private).
Comparison: Azure Policy (via Guest Configuration) offers deeper "in-OS" remediation capabilities similar to GPO, while AWS Config excels at resource-level governance.
8. Active Scenarios: Best Practices in Action
The following scenarios outline specific implementation blueprints for common hybrid use cases.
Scenario A: Secure Cloud Bursting (Hybrid Scalability)
Context: An organization runs steady-state HPC workloads on-premises but bursts to the cloud for peak capacity. Challenges: Data exposure, latency, identity continuity. Best Practices:
Identity Propagation: Do not use generic service accounts for cloud jobs. Use Trusted Identity Propagation (e.g., AWS IAM Identity Center). When the on-prem scheduler submits a job, it exchanges the user's on-prem credential for a short-lived cloud token with specific permissions. This preserves the audit trail of who ran the job.
Confidential Computing: Use Confidential VMs (e.g., AWS Nitro Enclaves, Azure Confidential Computing). These encrypt data in use (in memory) using hardware-based trusted execution environments (TEEs). Even the cloud provider cannot view the memory contents. This allows sensitive data to be processed in the public cloud securely.
Ephemeral Infrastructure: Use Infrastructure as Code (Terraform/CloudFormation) to spin up the burst environment only when needed and destroy it immediately after. This "phoenix server" pattern minimizes the attack surface window.
Scenario B: Securing Legacy Systems (The "Unprotectable")
Context: A critical legacy application (e.g., running on Windows Server 2008) cannot be patched or moved but needs remote access. Challenges: Known vulnerabilities, lack of MFA support. Best Practices:
Virtual Patching / Wrapping: Place the legacy asset behind a Web Application Firewall (WAF) or a reverse proxy. The WAF inspects traffic for exploits (e.g., SQLi, XSS) and blocks them before they reach the vulnerable server.
Identity Proxy: Place the app behind an Identity Aware Proxy (IAP). The user authenticates to the proxy using strong MFA and modern protocols. The proxy then establishes a connection to the legacy app. The app sees a "trusted" internal connection, but the user has passed modern security checks.
Air-Gapping/Micro-segmentation: Isolate the legacy server on a VLAN with zero internet access and strict ACLs allowing traffic only from the proxy.
Scenario C: Third-Party Vendor Access
Context: A vendor needs access to an OT system for maintenance. Challenges: Supply chain risk, excessive privilege. Best Practices:
Virtual Clean Rooms: Provision a sterile, isolated VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure) or "Clean Room" environment. The vendor logs into this environment, which contains only the tools they need. They cannot copy/paste data out, and the environment is destroyed after use.
Session Recording: Use a PAM solution to record the vendor's session (video/keystroke logs). This provides accountability and forensic data.
JIT Access: The vendor's account is only active during the approved maintenance window.
Scenario D: The Hybrid Workforce
Context: Employees accessing hybrid apps from personal (BYOD) and corporate devices. Challenges: Endpoint compromise, untrusted networks. Best Practices:
Device Posture Checks: Implement policies that check device health (OS version, patch level, encryption status) before granting access. If a device is non-compliant, access is blocked or remediated.
Secure Containers (MAM): For BYOD, use Mobile Application Management to create a secure container (e.g., encrypted Outlook app). Corporate data stays inside the container and can be remotely wiped without affecting personal data.
Browser Isolation: For risky web activity, use Remote Browser Isolation (RBI). The web page renders in a cloud container, and only a safe video stream is sent to the user's browser, neutralizing drive-by downloads.
9. Anatomy of Failure: Breach Analysis and Lessons Learned
Capital One (2019): A misconfigured WAF allowed an attacker to query the AWS Metadata Service (IMDSv1) and steal IAM credentials.
Lesson: Hybrid complexity requires rigorous configuration management. Enforce IMDSv2 (which requires a token) on all EC2 instances to prevent SSRF attacks. Treat cloud metadata as sensitive.
Ticketmaster (2023): Misconfigured S3 buckets allowed public access to data.
Lesson: Use CSPM (Cloud Security Posture Management) tools to continuously scan for public buckets. Enforce "Block Public Access" at the AWS Account/Azure Subscription level, overriding individual bucket settings.
Change Healthcare (2024): Compromised vendor credentials without MFA led to massive ransomware.
Lesson: Third-party risk is existential. Mandate MFA for all external access, including vendors. Use Conditional Access to restrict vendor logins to known IPs.
10. Conclusion and Strategic Roadmap
Guaranteeing cybersecurity in a hybrid environment is an exercise in architectural discipline. It requires dismantling the implicit trust of legacy networks and replacing it with a rigorous, identity-centric verification model.
Strategic Roadmap:
Phase 1: Visibility & Governance. Deploy unified discovery tools (Arc, SSM). Establish a hybrid CMDB. Define data sovereignty policies.
Phase 2: Identity & Access. Implement a centralized IdP with strong MFA and Conditional Access. Deploy PAM/JIT for admins.
Phase 3: Network Transformation. Transition from VPN to ZTNA. Implement micro-segmentation for critical assets.
Phase 4: Operational Automation. Automate patching and config management using Policy as Code. Integrate SIEM/SOAR for automated response.
By adhering to these principles, organizations can transform their hybrid environment from a security liability into a resilient, agile fortress capable of withstanding the modern threat landscape.
Citations: - NIST Frameworks & Controls - CIS Controls - Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) - Zero Trust Architecture - Identity, MFA, Conditional Access, Propagation - Network Security (VPN vs ZTNA) - Legacy Systems & CASB - Data Security, Encryption, Residency, Migration - Cloud Bursting, Confidential Computing - Vendor Access, PAM, JIT - Observability & Operations - Breaches & Case Studies
itavis.dk
Hybrid Cybersecurity: A Comprehensive Guide to Securing On-Premise and Cloud Environments - Itavis
Opens in a new window
cloudsecurityalliance.org
Hybrid Cloud Security – Top Challenges and Best Practices
Opens in a new window
crowdstrike.com
20 Cloud Security Best Practices - CrowdStrike
Opens in a new window
nist.gov
Cybersecurity Framework | NIST - National Institute of Standards and Technology
Opens in a new window
wiz.io
NIST Cloud Security Standards and Best Practices - Wiz
Opens in a new window
nccoe.nist.gov
Trusted Cloud: VMware Hybrid Cloud IaaS Environments | NCCoE
Opens in a new window
cloudsecurityalliance.org
Five Core Principles for Hybrid Cloud Security | CSA
Opens in a new window
sciencelogic.com
Hybrid Cloud Observability | ScienceLogic
Opens in a new window
cisecurity.org
CIS Critical Security Controls Version 8
Opens in a new window
cloudsecurityalliance.org
Hybrid Cloud Security | CSA
Opens in a new window
cisecurity.org
What You Need to Know About Hybrid Cloud Environments - CIS
Opens in a new window
researchgate.net
Cloud Security Automation: Enforcing CIS Benchmarks with AWS Config, Azure Policy, and OpenStack Chef Cookbooks - ResearchGate
Opens in a new window
onelogin.com
Where speed meets security: The role of real-time sync in IAM and why it matters - OneLogin
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
Azure Identity Management and access control security best practices - Microsoft Learn
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
Microsoft Entra Conditional Access: Zero Trust Policy Engine
Opens in a new window
joeyverlinden.com
Conditional Access Framework (2025.2.2) - Joey Verlinden
Opens in a new window
pingidentity.com
Just-in-Time Privileged Access Management | Ping Identity
Opens in a new window
cyberark.com
New Just-in-time Access Capabilities in Session Management - CyberArk
Opens in a new window
duo.com
Opens in a new window
duo.com
ZTNA vs VPN: Which One Is Better For Your Business | Duo Security
Opens in a new window
open-systems.com
ZTNA vs. VPN: Why It's Time to Rethink Remote Access - Open Systems
Opens in a new window
fortinet.com
ZTNA vs. VPN – What's the Better Cybersecurity Solution? - Fortinet
Opens in a new window
microsoft.com
What Is Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA)? | Microsoft Security
Opens in a new window
venn.com
VPN Tunneling: Protocols, Security Risks & Alternatives - Venn
Opens in a new window
fortinet.com
What is VPN Split Tunneling? - Fortinet
Opens in a new window
42gears.com
What is Split Tunnel VPN? Benefits, Risks and How to Secure It with MDM - 42Gears
Opens in a new window
pages.nist.gov
Implementing a Zero Trust Architecture: Full Document - NIST Pages
Opens in a new window
blog.gigamon.com
Hybrid Cloud Security Best Practices - Gigamon Blog
Opens in a new window
f5.com
What Is Hybrid Cloud Security? | F5
Opens in a new window
ibm.com
How data residency impacts security and compliance - IBM
Opens in a new window
oracle.com
Data Sovereignty vs. Data Residency: 3 Key Differences - Oracle
Opens in a new window
datastealth.io
Cloud Storage Data Residency: How To Achieve Compliance - DataStealth
Opens in a new window
tencentcloud.com
What are the data integrity verification methods in data security protection? - Tencent Cloud
Opens in a new window
tencentcloud.com
How can we ensure data integrity during database migration? - Tencent Cloud
Opens in a new window
datadoghq.com
Hybrid Cloud Monitoring | Datadog
Opens in a new window
splunk.com
A Unified Security and Observability Platform - Splunk
Opens in a new window
gartner.com
Amazon Web Services (AWS) vs Microsoft 2026 | Gartner Peer Insights
Opens in a new window
slashdot.org
Compare AWS Systems Manager vs. Azure Arc in 2026 - Slashdot
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
Cloud-native governance and policy with Azure Arc-enabled servers - Microsoft Learn
Opens in a new window
docs.aws.amazon.com
Trusted identity propagation overview - AWS IAM Identity Center - AWS Documentation
Opens in a new window
aws.amazon.com
How to implement trusted identity propagation for applications protected by Amazon Cognito
Opens in a new window
redhat.com
Secure cloud bursting: Leveraging confidential computing for peace of mind - Red Hat
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
Azure Confidential Clean Rooms Preview - Microsoft Learn
Opens in a new window
ioriver.io
What Is Cloud Bursting? Core Features & Benefits - IO River
Opens in a new window
msendpointmgr.com
Zero Trust for Legacy Systems: Bridging the Gap Without Compromising Principles
Opens in a new window
appgate.com
CISO Perspectives: Protecting Legacy Network Devices with ZTNA - AppGate
Opens in a new window
idc.com
Data Clean Rooms: Secure and Private Data Collaboration - IDC
Opens in a new window
nordlayer.com
Optimizing access to third-party resources in cloud environments - NordLayer
Opens in a new window
cyberark.com
Securing Remote Access: Best Practices for Third-Party Risk Management - CyberArk
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
How to Use Conditions in Conditional Access Policies - Microsoft Entra ID
Opens in a new window
zscaler.com
VPN vs. ZTNA: Which is Better for Secure Remote Access? - Zscaler, Inc.
Opens in a new window
sentinelone.com
50+ Cloud Security Statistics in 2026 - SentinelOne
Opens in a new window
xmcyber.com
Top 5 Hybrid Cloud Security Breaches in 5 Years - XM Cyber
Opens in a new window
nccoe.nist.gov
NIST SPECIAL PUBLICATION 1800-19B - Trusted Cloud - NCCoE
Opens in a new window
nvlpubs.nist.gov
Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations - NIST Technical Series Publications
Opens in a new window
cisecurity.org
CIS Critical Security Controls
Opens in a new window
cisecurity.org
The 18 CIS Critical Security Controls
Opens in a new window
cisecurity.org
Cloud Companion Guide for CIS Controls v8.1
Opens in a new window
cloudsecurityalliance.org
CSA Security Guidance for Cloud Computing
Opens in a new window
nvlpubs.nist.gov
Zero Trust Architecture - NIST Technical Series Publications
Opens in a new window
nist.gov
NIST Offers 19 Ways to Build Zero Trust Architectures
Opens in a new window
csrc.nist.gov
SP 1800-35, Implementing a Zero Trust Architecture | CSRC
Opens in a new window
okta.com
Top 9 Identity & Access Management Challenges with Your Hybrid IT Environment - Okta
Opens in a new window
media.defense.gov
Use Secure Cloud Identity and Access Management Practices
Opens in a new window
checkpoint.com
5 CASB Implementation Best Practices - Check Point Software
Opens in a new window
paloaltonetworks.com
What Is a Next-Generation CASB? | 102 Guide - Palo Alto Networks
Opens in a new window
crowdstrike.com
What is a Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB)? - CrowdStrike
Opens in a new window
blog.gigamon.com
Cloud Migration Checklist - Gigamon Blog
Opens in a new window
fidelissecurity.com
Cloud Network Security: Your Migration Checklist Made Simple
Opens in a new window
dam.defense.gov
OSD Cloud Migration Primer – March 2025
Opens in a new window
netwrix.com
Hybrid Cloud Security - Netwrix
Opens in a new window
checkpoint.com
Understanding Hybrid Cloud Security - Check Point Software
Opens in a new window
docs.cloud.google.com
Cloud bursting pattern | Cloud Architecture Center - Google Cloud Documentation
Opens in a new window
cloud.google.com
What is cloud bursting? | Google Cloud
Opens in a new window
learn.microsoft.com
Cloud Bursting Using Azure CycleCloud and Slurm - Microsoft Learn
Opens in a new window
aws.amazon.com
Simplify compliance management of multicloud or hybrid resources with AWS Config
Opens in a new window
ibm.com
2024 Cloud Threat Landscape Report: How does cloud security fail? - IBM
Opens in a new window
checkpoint.com
Top Cloud Security Challenges in 2025 - Check Point Software
Opens in a new window
cloudcomputing-news.net
10 real-life cloud security failures and what we can learn from them
No comments:
Post a Comment