Specific solution · Cybersecurity + Assurance

Zero trust architecture

Make every access path explain why it should be open.

EINO connects identity, resource sensitivity, device and workload state, policy decisions, enforcement, and review. Access stays useful for legitimate work while unnecessary reach is removed in controlled stages.

Discuss your context Explore capabilities

Contextual access decision trace

Explicit policy active

Identity + live contextAllow · verifiedStep-up · controlledDeny · exceptionProtected resource boundary

Evidence framework

Define proof before production.

Baselines and targets are agreed for each engagement. These dimensions shape what the team evaluates; they are not promised historical results.

Useful

Can people reach what their work requires?

Measure access success and service friction with the people, workflows, and recovery paths that depend on the policy.

Task completion
Sign-in success
Step-up rate
Support demand

Correct

Does policy contain unnecessary exposure?

Test what is allowed, challenged, denied, and revoked across expected use, misuse, and failure conditions.

Policy test pass rate
Reachable paths
Exception scope
Containment evidence

Operable

Can teams run access as context changes?

Observe identity lifecycle, entitlement review, policy drift, break-glass use, and time to resolve access failures.

Review completion
Policy drift
Break-glass use
Recovery time

Solution portfolio

Four connected control areas for explicit access.

Zero trust is not one product. It is a coordinated change to how people, devices, workloads, applications, and data request and receive access.

IDN

Identity + Privileged Access

Give each human and service identity only the access its work requires.

Connect reliable identity, phishing-resistant authentication, entitlement lifecycle, and privileged access to resource-aware policy. Recovery and emergency access remain explicit parts of the design.

Technical capability

Identity source + lifecycle integration
Phishing-resistant authentication
Single sign-on + contextual access
Role, attribute + relationship-based policy
Privileged access + just-in-time elevation
Entitlement review + verified recovery

Business application

Workforce application access
Administrator + production access
Contractor and partner access
Service account governance
Joiner, mover + leaver controls
Emergency and break-glass access

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

99.22%^{1Source 1}

lower estimated compromise risk with MFA

Microsoft study of commercial cloud accounts

95% vs 30%^{2Source 2}

consumer sign-in success with passkeys vs legacy methods

Microsoft account sign-in telemetry

14×^{2Source 2}

faster passkey sign-in

Compared with password-plus-code MFA in Microsoft telemetry

77%^{3Source 3}

reported positive impact on help-center calls

Independent US + UK enterprise passkey survey

SEG

Network + Application Segmentation

Replace broad reach with explicit paths to specific applications.

Map real service dependencies, group resources by operating need, and enforce allowed communication near the resource. Policy simulation and staged rollout protect legitimate traffic while reducing lateral pathways.

Technical capability

Application dependency + flow discovery
Macro- and microsegmentation design
Application-aware private access
Default-deny + explicit allow policy
Policy simulation + shadow enforcement
Containment, exception + rollback controls

Business application

Private application access
Cloud and data-center segmentation
Production and non-production isolation
Third-party service connectivity
Critical system containment
Merger and acquisition separation

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

19^{4Source 4}

example zero trust implementations

NIST NCCoE practice guide across multiple deployment approaches

24^{4Source 4}

technology collaborators in the NIST program

Four-year NCCoE implementation and testing effort

79%^{5Source 5}

ranked segmentation a top priority

Cisco 2025 security-practitioner study cited in its 2026 report

33%^{5Source 5}

had fully implemented macro + microsegmentation

The same practitioner study, showing the delivery gap

DEV

Device + Workload Trust

Use current device and workload state in each access decision.

Bind people, machines, services, and software workloads to identities that can be verified. Posture, vulnerability, provenance, secrets, and runtime signals can then change or end access.

Technical capability

Managed device identity + posture
Workload and service identity
Certificate + secret lifecycle
Vulnerability and configuration signals
Runtime attestation + behavior context
Quarantine, revocation + re-enrollment

Business application

Managed and bring-your-own devices
Remote and field workforce access
Cloud workload communication
Container and service-to-service access
Build pipeline + deployment identity
Compromised endpoint isolation

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

31%^{6Source 6}

of breaches began with vulnerability exploitation

2026 DBIR dataset of 19,905 known initial-access events

26%^{6Source 6}

of critical known-exploited vulnerabilities fully remediated

Organizations observed in the 2026 DBIR remediation data

43 days^{6Source 6}

median time to full critical-vulnerability resolution

2026 DBIR, up from 32 days in the prior dataset

+50%^{6Source 6}

critical vulnerabilities to patch at the median

Year-over-year change in the 2026 DBIR dataset

DAT

Data Protection + Continuous Access Evaluation

Keep access aligned with the sensitivity and current state of the data.

Classify important data, enforce use at application and data boundaries, and reassess active sessions as identity, device, workload, or threat context changes. Review and recovery close the loop.

Technical capability

Resource inventory + data classification
Fine-grained authorization + masking
Encryption + key policy integration
Session risk + continuous evaluation
Data-loss policy + egress controls
Access analytics, review + revocation

Business application

Sensitive record access
Research and intellectual property
Customer and payment data
Third-party data exchange
Cloud data platform access
Session revocation after risk change

Published results + market benchmarks

External research and case-study benchmarks. Results vary by use case.

48%^{6Source 6}

of breaches involved a third party

2026 DBIR, a 60% increase from the prior dataset

23%^{6Source 6}

fully remediated third-party cloud MFA exposure

2026 DBIR analysis of cloud-based MFA findings

~8 months^{6Source 6}

to resolve half of permission and weak-password findings

Third-party cloud exposures in the 2026 DBIR

97%^{7Source 7}

of AI-breached organizations lacked AI access controls

IBM/Ponemon study of 600 breached organizations

View research sources (7)

These are external benchmarks, estimates, and published case-study results—not guaranteed EINO outcomes. Results depend on scope, system conditions, implementation, and operating context.

01
Microsoft · 2023 · Commercial account telemetry study
How effective is multifactor authentication at deterring cyberattacks?
A method-documented analysis of commercial cloud accounts, including a manual review of 128,000 accounts with leaked credentials and estimated compromise risk with and without MFA.
Read source
02
Microsoft Learn · 2026 · Official product guidance + telemetry
Enable synced passkeys in Microsoft Entra ID
Microsoft consumer-account telemetry comparing passkey sign-in completion and speed with legacy sign-in and password-plus-code MFA.
Read source
03
FIDO Alliance · 2025 · Independent US + UK workforce survey
State of Passkey Deployment in the Enterprise
An independently commissioned September 2024 survey covering workforce passkey rollout, priority groups, barriers, user experience, security, productivity, and help-center effects.
Read source
04
National Institute of Standards and Technology · 2025 · Government cybersecurity practice guide
SP 1800-35: Implementing a Zero Trust Architecture
A four-year NCCoE program that integrated commercial technologies with 24 collaborators into 19 example implementations across identity governance, software-defined perimeter, microsegmentation, and SASE approaches.
Read source
05
Cisco · 2026 · Independent practitioner survey
The Segmentation Report 2026
Research conducted by Vanson Bourne with 400 US network-security practitioners at organizations of 500 or more employees, each reporting on a failed segmentation project from the prior 24 months.
Read source
06
Verizon Business · 2026 · Global incident + breach analysis
2026 Data Breach Investigations Report — Executive Summary
The 19th DBIR analyzes more than 31,000 security incidents and 22,000 confirmed breaches in 145 countries, with separate datasets disclosed for access vectors and third-party cloud remediation.
Read source
07
IBM + Ponemon Institute · 2025 · Global breach research
Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025
Ponemon Institute research sponsored and analyzed by IBM, based on breaches at 600 organizations worldwide from March 2024 through February 2025.
Read source

Operating contexts

The constraints shape the system.

Information sensitivity, decision authority, service expectations, and review obligations change what a responsible implementation requires.

GOV

Government + public services

Federated identities, public-facing services, contractors, legacy access paths, records duties, and emergency operations require policy that can be explained and recovered.

Workforce + partner identity
Case and records access
Break-glass operation

HLT

Healthcare + life sciences

Clinical availability, research collaboration, shared devices, sensitive records, validated workloads, and time-critical access shape where stronger checks can occur.

Clinical + research identity
Sensitive data boundaries
Availability + recovery

FIN

Financial services

Privileged operations, customer data, low-latency transactions, third-party services, separation of duties, and evidence obligations require fine-grained control.

Privileged operations
Transaction + data policy
Third-party access

Enterprise architecture

Every decision connects context to enforcement.

The architecture keeps identity and resource facts, policy decisions, enforcement, telemetry, exception handling, and recovery in one traceable operating loop.

Identity + resource facts

Human and service identities, devices, workloads, applications, data, sensitivity, ownership, and dependencies establish what is requesting what.

Request + live context

Authentication strength, device and workload state, location, behavior, threat signals, and intended action accompany the resource request.

Policy decision

Explicit policy returns allow, step-up, deny, limit, or revoke with a decision reason and an accountable exception path.

Enforcement + resource

Identity, endpoint, network, application, workload, and data controls enforce the decision close to the protected resource.

Telemetry + review + recovery

Decision and use telemetry feeds access review, policy tuning, incident action, break-glass oversight, rollback, and service recovery.

Controls that cross the system

Ownership + exception authority
Security + threat response
Observability + policy health
Evidence + decision trace
Recovery + break-glass

Enforcement patterns

Workforce access
Privileged access
Workload-to-workload
Data-level control

Selected around resource sensitivity, access path, response authority, failure impact, and operating ownership.

Enforcement strategy

Prioritize the access paths that change exposure.

Start with critical resources and plausible paths to them. Add identity, device, workload, network, application, and data controls where each can make and enforce a useful decision.

A system, not a maturity badge

Products and frameworks can support the work, but progress is shown by tested policy, reduced unnecessary reach, usable access, and clear operating ownership.

01
Establish
Identity before entitlement
Stabilize human and non-human identity lifecycle, strong authentication, privileged paths, and ownership where identity ambiguity creates broad access.
02
Qualify
Device state where it changes confidence
Use managed status, integrity, vulnerability, and threat signals when a device materially affects whether an access request should proceed.
03
Bind
Workload identity instead of shared secrets
Give services verifiable identities and short-lived credentials so application communication can be authorized, observed, and revoked.
04
Contain
Network paths around real dependencies
Remove unnecessary reach in bounded segments after traffic discovery and simulation show the legitimate flows the service needs.
05
Enforce
Application policy at the business action
Make authorization understand the requested function and resource instead of depending only on a broad role or network location.
06
Protect
Data controls at the sensitive boundary
Prioritize classification, fine-grained access, masking, egress policy, and continuous review where information consequence is highest.

Delivery path

Change access without interrupting the service.

Five stages preserve current paths while teams test policy, introduce enforcement, rehearse exceptions and rollback, and transfer day-to-day ownership.

01Frame
Which access paths change material exposure?
Map critical services, identities, resources, existing controls, current access paths, friction, incidents, owners, and explicit exclusions.
Current-state findings + priorities
02Shape
What should policy decide and where?
Define target decisions, enforcement points, coexistence, telemetry, exception authority, evidence, recovery, and staged adoption.
Target architecture + policy plan
03Make
Can policy run beside current access?
Integrate one bounded path in observe or simulation mode, using representative identities, resources, context, and existing access mechanisms.
Coexisting policy increment
04Prove
Will enforcement allow, challenge, deny, and recover correctly?
Test expected work, misuse, outages, stale context, step-up, break-glass, rollback, support, and user adoption before each enforcement wave.
Policy evidence + release decision
05Operate
Who owns each decision after release?
Stage enforcement, monitor friction and exposure, review entitlements and exceptions, rehearse recovery, and tune policy under named ownership.
Operating ownership + improvement backlog

A practical place to begin