The cyber security landscape of 2025 is witnessing a striking paradox. On the one hand, the market for solutions based on the Zero Trust philosophy is booming at an unprecedented rate, with forecasts indicating that it will grow to nearly $92 billion by 2030.
On the other hand, headlines on technology portals continue to report spectacular data breaches. This raises a fundamental question: with so many companies declaring Zero Trust implementation, why are we still so vulnerable to attacks? The answer lies in the growing gap between declarative adoption and deep, architectural implementation of this strategy.
Anatomy of Zero Trust: What’s behind the slogan?
To understand this gap, it is necessary to define precisely what Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) is. It is not a product you can buy and install, but a comprehensive security strategy based on a simple principle: “never trust, always verify”.
This model breaks with the archaic assumption that everything inside a corporate network is trustworthy. Instead, it assumes that the network is constantly compromised and that any attempted access, regardless of origin, is potentially hostile.
This philosophy is based on three inextricably linked pillars.
Firstly, overt verification, meaning that every access request is authenticated and authorised based on all available data, such as user identity, location or device status.
Secondly, the use of minimum privilege access, which drastically reduces the potential damage in the event of a breach by granting users only those privileges that are absolutely necessary to perform the task. Thirdly,
assumption that a breach has occurred, shifting the burden from preventing intrusions to rapidly detecting, isolating and responding to incidents, including through network microsegmentation.
Declarations versus reality: the great Zero Trust divide
At first glance, market data paints a picture of revolution. Research shows that 81% of companies have already implemented a Zero Trust model or are actively working on it. This enthusiasm is driven by real needs: the disappearance of the traditional network ‘wall’ in the age of remote working and the cloud, the growing sophistication of threats and regulatory pressures, such as the mandate to implement ZT in US federal agencies by the end of 2024.
However, a deeper analysis reveals that adoption is broad, but still very shallow. Many organisations confuse the implementation of a strategy with the purchase of a single tool, such as a Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) solution, which only 34% of companies have.
Hard data shows that only 29% of companies base their access policy primarily on identity, which is the absolute basis of ZTA, and only 26% have implemented the principle of least privilege.
A study by the Ponemon Institute found that although 61% of respondents said their organisations had adopted Zero Trust, only 18% had implemented all of its key principles. This shows that most companies are only at the beginning of the journey.
Barriers to maturity
This gap is due to the fact that the true implementation of Zero Trust is an extremely difficult task. The main barriers are outdated systems and technological debt, which are expensive and risky to upgrade.
Added to this are budget constraints and a lack of internal expertise, with as many as 47% of companies citing a lack of expertise as their biggest challenge. Cultural resistance cannot be ignored either; moving from a ‘trust but verify’ mentality to a ‘never trust’ mentality requires the commitment of the entire organisation, from management to employees.
Practical value and a look to the future
Despite these challenges, the value of a mature ZT architecture cannot be overstated. In the traditional model, compromised employee credentials become the ‘golden key’ to the entire network for an attacker.
In the Zero Trust model, the same login attempt triggers a series of contextual verifications, and even if an attacker gains access, their movements are drastically limited by microsegmentation and the principle of least privilege, minimising the ‘radius of attack’.
The future of Zero Trust lies in further evolution and integration with new technologies. Artificial intelligence will become the operational brain of ZTA, automating real-time risk analysis. We are also seeing a progressive convergence with the Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) model, which combines network and security functions into a single cloud service.
It is crucial for IT and business leaders to take a pragmatic approach. Rather than throwing oneself into buying new technology, start with an honest assessment of maturity and identify the biggest gaps.
The foundation of any strategy should be to strengthen identity through the uncompromising implementation of multi-factor authentication (MFA). Implementing MFA is a marathon, not a sprint – it should be planned in thoughtful, realistic phases.
Most importantly, this transformation requires the unequivocal support of management, who must see it not as a cost, but as a strategic investment in the resilience and continuity of the entire business. Zero Trust is not a goal that can be achieved, but an ongoing commitment that in today’s digital age becomes a condition for survival.
