Review of zero trust architecture and its technical applications

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1671-1122.2026.08.007

Abstract

Abstract:

With the rapid development of cloud computing and the Internet of things (IoT), network boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred, exposing the limitations of traditional perimeter-based security models. The zero trust security model follows the principle of “never trust, always verify”, requiring continuous authentication for every access attempt without assuming trust for any device or user. This paper reviewed the core concepts and evolution of zero trust, summarized leading architectures, and examined key supporting technologies. It further explored zero trust applications in cloud computing, IoT, and blockchain, analyzed its advantages and limitations, particularly its applicability in multi-cloud environments and resource-constrained IoT devices. Finally, it investigated technical challenges and debated surrounding zero trust implementation, highlighted future research directions, with a focus on the potential integration of artificial intelligence and zero trust.

Key words: zero trust, identity and access management, software-defined perimeter, micro-segmentation, zero trust application

CLC Number:

TP309

Zhao Min, Qu Kangjian. Review of zero trust architecture and its technical applications[J]. Netinfo Security, 2026, 26(8): 1250-1263.

Figures/Tables 13

References 65

[1]	Spina M G, De R F, Iera A. From centralized to distributed and ubiquitous in-network defense for future 6G networks[C]//2024 15th International Conference on Network of the Future (NoF). New York: IEEE, 2024: 91-95.
[2]	Makhdoomi A, Jan N, Pala K, et al. Conventional and next generation firewalls in network security and its applications[C]// 2022 International Conference on Computing, Communication, and Intelligent Systems (ICCCIS). New York: IEEE, 2022: 964-969.
[3]	Hylender D, Langlois P, Pinto A, et al. Version 2024 data breach investigations report[EB/OL]. (2024-05-23)[2026-02-16]. https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/reports/dbir/CMP=OOH_SMB_OTH_22222_MC_20200501_NA_NM20200079_00001.
[4]	王群, 袁泉, 李馥娟, 等. 零信任网络及其关键技术综述[J]. 计算机应用, 2023, 43(4): 1142-1150. doi: 10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2022030453
[5]	Kindervag J, Balaouras S, Mak K, et al. No more chewy centers: introducing the zero trust model of information security[EB/OL]. (2016-03-23)[2026-02-16]. https://www.forrester.com/report/No-More-Chewy-Centers-The-Zero-Trust-Model-Of-Information-Security/RES56682.
[6]	Bertino E. Zero trust architecture: does it help[J]. IEEE Security & Privacy, 2021, 19(5): 95-96.
[7]	NIST. Zero trust architecture[EB/OL]. (2020-08-10)[2026-02-16]. https://www.nist.gov/publications/zero-trust-architecture.
[8]	中国通信标准化协会. 零信任安全技术参考框架[EB/OL]. (2024- 04-01)[2026-02-16]. https://openstd.samr.gov.cn/bzgk/std/newGbInfo?hcno=C166002FE253A840E56BEBF13B4945E7.
[9]	吴倩琳, 孔松. 零信任发展与应用研究[J]. 信息通信技术与政策, 2025, 51(1): 46-51. doi: 10.12267/j.issn.2096-5931.2025.01.007
[10]	刘凌旗, 谢佳琦. 美国零信任发展及其国防领域布局研究[J]. 战术导弹技术, 2025(1): 26-32.
[11]	Moubayed A, Refaey A, Shami A. Software-defined perimeter (SDP): state of the art secure solution for modern networks[J]. IEEE Network, 2019, 33(5): 226-233.
[12]	刘远, 孙晨, 张嫣玲. 基于Overlay技术的零信任网络研究[J]. 信息网络安全, 2020, 20(10): 83-91.
[13]	蔡东赟. 腾讯iOA零信任安全技术实践[J]. 信息安全与通信保密, 2020(S1): 98-102.
[14]	Bonneau J, Herley C, Van O P C, et al. The quest to replace passwords: a framework for comparative evaluation of web authentication schemes[C]// 2012 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. New York: IEEE, 2012: 553-567.
[15]	Mahmoud M, Kasem M S, Kang H S. A comprehensive survey of masked faces: recognition, detection, and unmasking[J]. Applied Sciences, 2024, 14(19): 8781-8818.
[16]	Carrillo-Torres D, Perez-Diaz J A, Cantoral-Ceballos J A, et al. A novel multi-factor authentication algorithm based on image recognition and user established relations[J]. Applied Sciences, 2023, 13(3): 1374-1389.
[17]	Otta S P, Panda S, Gupta M, et al. A systematic survey of multi-factor authentication for cloud infrastructure[J]. Future Internet, 2023, 15(4): 146-166.
[18]	Bissada A, Olmsted A. Mobile multi-factor authentication[C]// 2017 12th International Conference for Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (ICITST). New York: IEEE, 2017: 210-211.
[19]	Aldarwish A J Y, Yassin A A, Rashid A M, et al. Multi-factor authentication for an administrator’s devices in an IoT environment[C]// International Conference on Advances in Cyber Security (ACeS 2020). Heidelberg: Springer, 2021: 27-47.
[20]	Hayashi E, Das S, Amini S, et al. CASA: context-aware scalable authentication[EB/OL]. (2013-07-24)[2026-02-16]. https://m.booksci.cn/literature/123151081.htm.
[21]	Buthpitiya S, Zhang Ying, Dey A K, et al. N-gram geo-trace modeling[C]// The 9th International Conference on Pervasive Computing. Heidelberg: Springer, 2011: 97-114.
[22]	Jakobsson M, Shi E, Golle P, et al. Implicit authentication for mobile devices[EB/OL]. (2009-02-25)[2026-02-16]. https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/hotsec09/tech/full_papers/jakobsson.pdf.
[23]	Benzekki K, El F A, Elbelrhiti E A. A context-aware authentication system for mobile cloud computing[J]. Procedia Computer Science, 2018(127): 379-387.
[24]	Frank M, Biedert R, Ma E, et al. Touchalytics: on the applicability of touchscreen input as a behavioral biometric for continuous authentication[J]. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 2013, 8(1): 136-148.
[25]	Nickel C, Busch C, Rangarajan S, et al. Using hidden markov models for accelerometer-based biometric gait recognition[C]// 2011 IEEE 7th International Colloquium on Signal Processing and its Applications. New York: IEEE, 2011: 58-63.
[26]	Saevanee H, Clarke N, Furnell S, et al. Continuous user authentication using multi-modal biometrics[J]. Computers & Security, 2015(53): 234-246.
[27]	Roth J, Liu Xiaoming, Metaxas D. On continuous user authentication via typing behavior[J]. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2014, 23(10): 4611-4624.
[28]	Syed N F, Shah S W, Shaghaghi A, et al. Zero trust architecture (ZTA): a comprehensive survey[J]. IEEE Access, 2022(10): 57143-57179.
[29]	Bijon K Z, Krishnan R, Sandhu R. A framework for risk-aware role based access control[C]// 2013 IEEE Conference on Communications and Network Security (CNS). New York: IEEE, 2013: 462-469.
[30]	Premkamal P K, Pasupuleti S K, Singh A K, et al. Enhanced attribute based access control with secure deduplication for big data storage in cloud[J]. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 2021, 14(1): 102-120.
[31]	Wang Haichao, Ren Zhiyu, Zhang Tianpeng, et al. A distributed ABAC access control scheme based on blockchain[C]// 2022 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Blockchain (CCSB). New York: IEEE, 2022: 19-25.
[32]	Rouhani S, Deters R. Blockchain based access control systems: state of the art and challenges[C]// IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence. New York: ACM, 2019: 423-428.
[33]	Albrecht M, Chase M, Chen Hao, et al. Homomorphic encryption standard[EB/OL]. (2022-01-04)[2026-02-16]. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-77287-1_2.
[34]	Zhao Chuan, Zhao Shengnan, Zhao Minghao, et al. Secure multi-party computation: theory, practice and applications[J]. Information Sciences, 2019(476): 357-372.
[35]	Turan M S, Mckay K A, Calik C, et al. Status report on the first round of the NIST lightweight cryptography standardization process[EB/OL]. (2019-10-07)[2026-02-16]. https://csrc.nist.rip/publications/detail/nistir/8268/final.
[36]	Lo O, Buchanan W J, Carson D. Power analysis attacks on the AES-128 S-box using differential power analysis (DPA) and correlation power analysis (CPA)[J]. Journal of Cyber Security Technology, 2017, 1(2): 88-107.
[37]	Bogdanov A, Knudsen L R, Leander G, et al. PRESENT: an ultra-lightweight block cipher[C]// Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems-CHES 2007: The 9th International Workshop. Heidelberg: Springer, 2007: 450-466.
[38]	Indrajati D, Ashari W M. Evaluation of the effectiveness of lightweight encryption algorithms on data performance and security on IoT devices[J]. Journal of Applied Informatics and Computing, 2025, 9(3): 642-650.
[39]	Buchanan W J, Li Shancang, Asif R. Lightweight cryptography methods[J]. Journal of Cyber Security Technology, 2017, 1(3): 187-201.
[40]	Basta N, Ikram M, Ali K M, et al. Towards a zero-trust micro-segmentation network security strategy: an evaluation framework[C]// NOMS 2022-2022 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium. New York: IEEE, 2022: 1-7.
[41]	Liu Chunwen, Tan Ru, Wu Yang, et al. Dissecting zero trust: research landscape and its implementation in IoT[EB/OL]. (2024-05-03)[2026-02-16]. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42400-024-00212-0.
[42]	Vanickis R, Jacob P, Dehghanzadeh S, et al. Access control policy enforcement for zero-trust-networking[C]// 2018 29th Irish Signals and Systems Conference (ISSC). New York: IEEE, 2018: 1-6.
[43]	Klein D. Micro-segmentation: securing complex cloud environments[J]. Network Security, 2019(3): 6-10.
[44]	NetFoundry. OpenZiti documentation[EB/OL]. (2025-06-16)[2026-02-16]. https://openziti.io/docs/learn/introduction/.
[45]	Cisco. Application centric infrastructure[EB/OL]. (2024-04-16)[2026-02-16]. https://www.cisco.com/c/en_au/solutions/data-centervirtualization/application-centric-infrastructure/index.html.
[46]	VMware. VMware NSX[EB/OL]. (2025-03-13)[2026-02-16]. https://www.vmware.com/products/cloud-infrastructure/nsx.
[47]	Pace M. Zero trust networks with istio[D]. Torino: Politecnico di Torino, 2021.
[48]	Kovacevic I, Stojkov M, Simic M. Authentication and identity management based on zero trust security model in micro-cloud environment[C]//International Conference on Intelligent Science and Technology 2023. Heidelberg: Springer, 2024: 481-489.
[49]	Arora S, Hastings J. Microsegmented cloud network architecture using open-source tools for a zero trust foundation[C]//2024 17th International Conference on Security of Information and Networks (SIN). New York: IEEE, 2024: 1-8.
[50]	Shakya S, Abbas R, Maric S. A novel zero-touch, zero-trust, AI/ML enablement framework for IoT network security[EB/OL]. (2025-02-05)[2026-02-16]. https://papers.cool/arxiv/2502.03614.
[51]	吴克河, 程瑞, 姜啸晨, 等. 基于SDP的电力物联网安全防护方案[J]. 信息网络安全, 2022, 22(2):32-38.
[52]	Huang Wenhua, Xie Xuemin, Wang Ziying, et al. ZT-access: a combining zero trust access control with attribute-based encryption scheme against compromised devices in power IoT environments[EB/OL]. (2023-06-01)[2026-02-16]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2023.103161.
[53]	Alipour M A, Ghasemshirazi S, Shirvani G. Enabling a zero trust architecture in a 5G-enabled smart grid[EB/OL]. (2022-10-21)[2026-02-16]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01739.
[54]	陈岑, 屈志昊, 汪明, 等. 面向电网安全的零信任动态访问控制[J]. 重庆大学学报, 2024, 47(8): 81-89.
[55]	Allouzi M A, Khan J. Enabling zero trust security in IoMT edge network[EB/OL]. (2024-02-16)[2026-02-16]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.10389.
[56]	Xie Mingyue, Chang Zheng, Alfarraj O, et al. BAZAM: a blockchain-assisted zero-trust authentication in multi-UAV wireless networks[EB/OL]. (2024-06-30)[2026-02-16]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00630.
[57]	Chang Y C, Lin Yushan, Sangaiahc A K, et al. A private blockchain system based on zero trust architecture[C]// 2024 26th International Conference on Advanced Communications Technology (ICACT). New York: IEEE, 2024: 143-146.
[58]	Cheng Tongtong, Chi Cheng, Zhang Yuwen, et al. The appliance of decentralized identifiers in zero trust network[C]// 2023 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain. New York: IEEE, 2023: 198-202.
[59]	Sun Sheng, Repeta M, Healy M, et al. Towards 5G zero trusted air interface architecture[EB/OL]. (2022-11-07)[2026-02-16]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.03776.
[60]	Hatakeyama K, Kotani D, Okabe Y. Zero trust federation: sharing context under user control towards zero trust in identity federation[C]// 2021 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops and Other Affiliated Events (PerCom Workshops). New York: IEEE, 2021: 514-519.
[61]	Haque E, Hasan K, Ahmed I, et al. Enhancing UAV security through zero trust architecture: an advanced deep learning and explainable AI analysis[C]// 2024 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC). New York: IEEE, 2024: 463-467.
[62]	Cheng Ruizhi, Chen Songqing, Han Bo. Toward zero-trust security for the metaverse[J]. IEEE Communications Magazine, 2024, 62(2): 156-162.
[63]	张伟, 李子轩, 徐晓瑀, 等. SDP-CoAP:基于软件定义边界的安全增强CoAP通信框架设计[J]. 信息网络安全, 2023, 23(8):17-31.
[64]	黄杰, 何城鋆. 基于软件定义边界的服务保护方案[J]. 信息网络安全, 2023, 23(6):1-10.
[65]	郭宝霞, 王佳慧, 马利民, 等. 基于零信任的敏感数据动态访问控制模型研究[J]. 信息网络安全, 2022, 22(6):86-93.

比较层面	零信任模型	传统模型
网络边界	不存在传统意义上的边界，任何位置发出的请求都需要验证	依赖明确的物理或逻辑边界来区分内部网络和外部网络
信任假设	用户、设备或网络都不应默认信任，所有访问请求都需要严格审查	默认信任内部网络，外部网络通过边界设备防护
技术架构	无明确边界，采用身份管理、行为分析、最小权限访问和强认证机制等技术	基于防火墙、入侵检测系统、虚拟专用网络等传统边界安全技术
身份验证	持续身份验证	一次性验证
访问控制	基于身份、属性、风险等访问控制和最小权限原则，实现精细化控制	主要基于网络位置、防火墙设置，如基于IP的访问控制

方法	应用场景	内容
文献[16]方法	通用	提出一种基于图像识别的验证算法，通过结合图像和用户关系实现双因素认证
文献[17]方法	云计算	系统性综述多因素验证在云计算中的应用，提出多种增强身份验证方案
文献[18]方法	移动设备	在电子支付应用中，结合硬件和软件双因素认证提升移动端应用的安全性
文献[19]方法	物联网	结合智能卡、生物识别和令牌设备，设计了一种适用于物联网环境的多因素验证方案

方法	上下文信息	内容
文献[20]方法	位置	通过Wi-Fi和基站数据获取用户位置，利用位置信息进行风险评估，并确定应采取的主动身份验证方式
文献[21]方法	用户移动模式	通过n-gram模型对用户的移动模式进行建模，从而识别手机设备是否可能被盗的异常实例
文献[22]方法	用户行为特征	利用设备位置、电子邮件检查时间等行为特征进行计算，并将结果与阈值进行对比，以判断是否执行隐式身份认证
文献[23]方法	时空信息、操作系统、设备型号、余弦相似度	一种针对云服务的上下文感知用户身份验证机制，该机制通过用户的代理采集上下文信息，并将其发送至云端身份验证系统。系统将收到的信息与用户的已有信息进行对比，从而验证身份

项目	部署模式	微隔离方法
OpenZiti^[44]	覆盖模型	采用SDP架构的基于身份的访问控制策略
Cisco ACI^[45]	本地模型	基于网络身份（如IP地址、端口）和更高层级的可视化能力
VMware NSX^[46]	第三方模型	基于网络身份，采用第三方提供的高层级可视化产品
Istio^[47]	覆盖模型	基于API感知的访问控制，将工作流分解为更小的基于容器的服务，这些服务使用API进行通信

方法	应用场景	主要贡献	优缺点
文献[59]方法	5G	提出5G零信任参考模型，利用机器学习实现基于上下文的访问控制，探讨区块链认证	优点：架构解耦，抗内部攻击；缺点：验证开销大，影响吞吐量
文献[60]方法	身份联盟	提出零信任联盟，引入上下文属性提供者，基于UMA协议设计用户授权机制，解决依赖方上下文缺失问题	优点：隐私保护，去中心化；缺点：上下文未标准化，扩展性差
文献[61]方法	人工智能、无人机	摒弃边界防护，整合可解释人工智能技术，对所有实体进行持续认证	优点：提升决策透明度和识别准确性；缺点：难以构建适应无人机动态特性的持续认证机制
文献[62]方法	VR、元宇宙	联邦学习保护生物识别隐私，结合多模态数据与自适应机制提升认证能力	优点：多模态与自适应机制提升可用性；缺点：算法在生物识别认证中准确率较低
文献[63]方法	物联网	基于SDP实现先认证后通信，通过多维度实时评估实现动态访问	优点：资源受限终端性能消耗低；缺点：网关至服务器段无安全保护
文献[64]方法	远程访问	采集固件层与内核层数据，设计信任评估算法持续评估终端安全	优点：基于固件信息的持续采集方法；缺点：仅限Windows设备，兼容性差
文献[65]方法	敏感数据安全保护	基于模糊层次分析法计算多源属性信任值，引入滑动窗口更新机制	优点：实现基于多源属性的动态信任评估；缺点：时延与CPU消耗高于默认算法