Data-centric security

Data-centric security

Designing modern security

Balancing security isn’t simple. How can you identify the areas that require attention and invest the “right amount” of resources?

The problem with any issue comprised of many unrelated components is that it’s nearly impossible to plan a proper strategy, assign value, and achieve a balanced approach to cover everything. The result is uneven security. Some areas are heavily fortified, while others have no coverage.

The article starts putting some order in this chaos to understand where things belong and how valuable they are.

Perimeter and Data-Centric

First, let’s divide our security universe between measures designed to keep outsiders out and measures aimed to prevent bad people from getting to the data. Perimeter security prevents access to the corporate network, while data-centric security protects data from malicious access.

A good test to check if a security measure is part of the perimeter or data-centric is asking: “Is this going to protect us from an insider threat?” Insider threats are people who work for the company, so they are already inside the perimeter. If a measure will prevent them from stealing or modifying data, it’s a measure that protects the data.


In general, external attackers usually need to breach an internal asset before gaining access to data. That is a perimeter breach, a frequent precursor to a data breach.

However, there are a few exceptions to that rule. For example, a publicly-facing application could give data access without breaching anything other than that application. That is an example of data that can be accessed directly from the outside without perimeter protection. Another example is data outside the perimeter, like a laptop or a backup tape outside the building. They also have no perimeter protection and can be stolen without access to internal assets. Obviously, the perimeter also doesn’t protect us from an insider threat that’s already inside the perimeter.

Perimeter security is crucial, but none of these measures are airtight. That means perimeter security only aims to reduce the number of attacks on the data, not prevent them.

For example, email security only intends to reduce spam, not prevent it. The spam we get almost every day is definite proof of that. Even if one perimeter measure was airtight, there are too many other perimeter attack vectors that it’s foolish to pretend we can cover them all perfectly. Therefore, the perimeter aims to reinforce data-centric measures, not replace them. And relying on the perimeter alone ensures we’ll have a data breach.


While some consider it an exaggeration, we believe data-centric measures should aspire to be airtight. That’s a strong statement in sharp contrast to the perimeter and is not easy to achieve. But it’s not impossible.

Data-centric, as a whole, is usually our last line of defense. We have no other barriers to protect us beyond it. When all the data-centric measures fail, we’ll have a data breach. So, if possible, we should overlay data-centric measures to get additional protection. That’s possible because data-centric measures deploy in serial, unlike perimeter protection, which is in parallel.

As data-centric revolves around data, database and application security are the main pillars. We also have server security along with physical and network security for the data center, encryption of data at rest, and controls against administrators. We’re talking about everything that stands between people and the data.


We have our first division of security between perimeter and data-centric. We also identified the role of data-centric security in protecting us from internal threats and external threats that penetrate the perimeter.

Finally, we aim to make our data-centric protection airtight. That will be the subject for the next two weeks, looking at IDS vs. IPS and how to leverage the risk/control matrix.

As people increasingly work from home, the perimeter becomes impossible to secure. We have no control over the physical perimeter of people at home, their home network, personal computers, or all their devices. A lost battle that symbolizes the death of the perimeter. One more reason why data-centric protection is the primary form of security in the 21st century.

LinkedIn Post

Check out a summary posted on LinkedIn

Read Post →