Get Actionable Cybersecurity Insight delivered directly to Your Inbox

Most civilian agencies still have a practical problem at the access layer: users are granted access based on static roles, but the risk around that user changes throughout the day. The user may move from a managed laptop to an unmanaged device. The session may originate from an unusual location. The endpoint may fall out of compliance. The account may show abnormal behavior. If the access decision does not change when the risk changes, the agency is not operating at OMB M-22-

Most civilian agencies still have a privilege problem hiding inside normal operations: static Active Directory groups, standing administrator roles, VPN-era access assumptions, and quarterly access reviews that do not respond to user risk in the moment. That model does not hold up against the CISA ZTMM User Pillar or the identity direction in OMB M-22-09. Explore how conditional user access has to move from policy language into enforceable rules.

Explore the intricacies of DTM 25-003 and how DoD programs should implement periodic authentication rules. Explore how DTM 25-003 requires deciding, in near real time, whether that user should keep the same privileges after the mission, device, behavior, or risk context changes.

Conditional user access is not an MFA project. To meet OMB M-22-09, it is an enterprise ICAM operating model tied to attributes, privileged access, policy enforcement, monitoring, and ATO boundaries. Agencies are trying to build that while operating under continuing resolution uncertainty, lean IT staffing, FedRAMP procurement constraints, and production systems that cannot be taken offline for identity redesign. This blog details how to get it right with the right sequencing

Most DoD program offices do not fail at conditional user access because they lack identity tools. They fail because identity is still fragmented across mission applications, privileged access workflows, directory services, and local authorization tables. Under DTM 25-003, that model does not hold. Conditional access depends on enterprise ICAM that can provide current identity, credential, privilege, and attribute data to the systems making access decisions.

Conditional access breaks down fast when user attributes live in too many places. We see this across agencies: HR owns one version of the user, Active Directory owns another, the identity provider has a partial profile, and mission applications maintain local roles that nobody reconciles until access is wrong. That is not a tool problem first. It is an attribute architecture problem, and it affects how well an agency can implement OMB M-22-09 and the CISA Zero Trust Maturity

Conditional user access fails in DoD environments when every application, enclave, and mission system defines identity attributes its own way. The policy engine may be modern, the MFA may be in place, and the dashboard may look clean, but the access decision is still weak if the attributes behind it are local, stale, or disconnected from enterprise ICAM. Under DTM 25-003, that is not a small implementation detail. Explore what DTM 25-003 requires for Conditional User Access.

Explore how DTM 25-003 mandates centralized identity management for DoD ZTA CoA. Ensure compliance with DTM 25-003 by understanding user inventory requirements.

Building a multi-tenant SaaS is fundamentally different from building an internal enterprise application. This article shares real-world lessons learned while designing SWIPE, focusing on data isolation at the database level, Zero Trust networking, resilience without maintenance windows, and continuous security through automated DevSecOps. Learn why tenant-aware architecture, scalable infrastructure, and continuous monitoring are critical to building secure, resilient, and co

Learn how to build CJIS and FedRAMP Moderate compliant infrastructure with Amazon Q Developer. Achieve CJIS compliance in AWS Public Cloud.

In our latest Zephon blog, we break down why AI’s inconsistency is really a governance issue — and how Zero Trust, strong data discipline, and human oversight can turn AI from chaos into a force multiplier.

The 2026 Intelligence Authorization Act tackles Salt Typhoon, reshapes ODNI, and sets AI guardrails. Learn how Zero Trust defends against nation-state threats.

CVE-2025-53770 SharePoint vulnerability (CVSS 9.8) actively exploited against 54+ major organizations including banks and government entities. Attackers extract cryptographic secrets for persistent access even post-patching. This crisis exposes fundamental architectural flaws—CISOs must shift from emergency response to Zero Trust transformation. Immediate actions: patch, rotate keys, segment networks. Strategic imperative: use this as catalyst for security architecture overha

On July 18, 2025, a critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability, CVE-2025-53770, was identified in Microsoft SharePoint Server, with a CVSS score of 9.8, marking it as one of the most severe threats to on-premises SharePoint environments. Explore essential strategies to safeguard against SharePoint Vulnerabilities and learn how CVE-2025-53770 impacts systems and protect SharePoint Vulnerabilities.

Explore how Zero Trust 2.0, enhanced by AI, revolutionizes threat detection. Discover Zero Trust strategies for advanced security insights.

Zero Trust is a cybersecurity model that assumes no user or device is trustworthy by default, requiring continuous verification for access. This approach has shifted from a theoretical idea to a critical strategy, particularly for federal agencies dealing with complex, distributed IT environments. This blog explores how Zero Trust has become essential, highlighting its adoption in federal settings, regulatory drivers, and practical steps for leaders.

Introduction In today’s threat landscape, cyber attacks are not slowing down – they’re escalating in volume and sophistication. Yet many...

Today Microsoft is everywhere. Active Directory was the enterprise infrastructure backbone once, and still is. However, our dependence on...

This article dives into 5 proven strategies that organizations can use today to reduce these costs when migrating to zero trust security.