Fact-checked by the SnapMessages editorial team
Quick Answer
In July 2025, zero-trust network access (ZTNA) offers stronger remote access protection than traditional VPNs for most organizations. VPNs grant broad network access once authenticated, while zero-trust verifies every session and limits lateral movement. According to Gartner, 60% of enterprises will phase out most VPNs in favor of ZTNA by 2025.
The VPN vs zero-trust debate has moved from theoretical to urgent. A traditional VPN creates an encrypted tunnel to your network — but once a user is inside, they often have broad access to resources they should never touch. Zero-trust network access (ZTNA), by contrast, operates on the principle of “never trust, always verify,” granting access only to specific applications based on identity, device health, and context. According to Cybersecurity Insiders’ VPN Risk Report, 56% of organizations experienced a cyberattack that exploited their VPN in the past year.
With remote and hybrid work now a permanent fixture, choosing the right access model is a foundational security decision — not a minor IT preference.
How Does a VPN Actually Protect Remote Access?
A VPN encrypts traffic between a remote user and a corporate network, masking data in transit and providing a single authenticated entry point. This model was designed when most enterprise resources lived on-premises, and workers needed a secure path into a physical data center.
The core mechanism is simple: once authenticated, a VPN client tunnels all traffic through a gateway server. This gives users broad network visibility — including access to file shares, internal tools, and sometimes entire subnets. The problem is that broad access is exactly what attackers exploit after compromising credentials.
Where VPNs Fall Short
VPNs suffer from what security professionals call implicit trust: any authenticated user is treated as trusted, regardless of device health or behavior. According to Zscaler’s 2023 VPN Risk Report, 88% of organizations are concerned their VPN is being used by attackers to move laterally through their network. VPNs also introduce bottlenecks — all traffic routed through a central gateway creates latency and a single point of failure.
Key Takeaway: Traditional VPNs encrypt traffic effectively but grant broad network access after authentication, creating dangerous lateral movement risk. Zscaler’s research found 88% of security teams worry their VPN is actively exploited for internal network movement.
How Does Zero-Trust Network Access Work Differently?
Zero-trust operates on one core rule: no user, device, or application is trusted by default — even inside the network perimeter. Every access request is evaluated continuously based on identity, device posture, location, and the specific resource being requested.
ZTNA solutions like Cloudflare Access, Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, and Zscaler Private Access broker connections between users and individual applications. The user never touches the broader network. They authenticate, the system checks their device health and role, and they receive access only to the one app they need — nothing more.
Continuous Verification in Practice
Unlike a VPN session that stays open for hours, zero-trust platforms re-evaluate trust signals continuously. If a device suddenly shows a malware signature mid-session, access is revoked automatically. This is a critical capability for hybrid work environments where employees connect from personal and corporate devices across multiple locations. For a broader look at how attackers exploit trusted sessions, see our guide on what social engineering is and how hackers exploit it.
Key Takeaway: Zero-trust network access grants access to individual applications, not entire networks, and re-evaluates trust continuously per session. Platforms like Cloudflare Access enforce this model without exposing the broader corporate network to remote users.
VPN vs Zero-Trust: How Do They Compare on Key Security Factors?
The two models differ across every dimension that matters for modern remote access: access scope, scalability, breach impact, and cloud compatibility.
| Factor | Traditional VPN | Zero-Trust (ZTNA) |
|---|---|---|
| Access Scope | Broad network access | Per-application access only |
| Trust Model | Implicit trust after login | Continuous verification per session |
| Lateral Movement Risk | High — attacker moves freely | Low — blast radius is contained |
| Cloud Compatibility | Poor — designed for on-prem | Strong — natively cloud-aware |
| Performance | Central gateway bottleneck | Direct app access, lower latency |
| Average Deployment Cost | $50–$100 per user/year | $100–$200 per user/year |
| Breach Containment | Network-wide exposure | Single app exposure |
The cost gap between VPNs and ZTNA is narrowing as adoption scales. For organizations already running cloud infrastructure on Microsoft Azure, AWS, or Google Cloud, ZTNA often integrates natively — reducing total cost of ownership compared to maintaining legacy VPN hardware.
“The VPN was never designed for a world where users, data, and applications all live outside the traditional network perimeter. Zero-trust isn’t just an upgrade — it’s a fundamentally different philosophy about what ‘access’ means.”
Key Takeaway: In a direct VPN vs zero-trust comparison, ZTNA limits breach impact to a single application rather than the entire network. According to Gartner’s network security forecast, ZTNA is the fastest-growing segment in network security, projected to grow at 31% annually through 2026.
When Should You Use a VPN vs Zero-Trust in 2025?
VPNs still have legitimate use cases, but zero-trust is the right default for most modern organizations. The key is matching the tool to the threat model and infrastructure.
A VPN remains appropriate for small teams with purely on-premises infrastructure, site-to-site connectivity between physical offices, or low-risk consumer use cases like bypassing geo-restrictions. If your entire workforce is fewer than 20 people and all resources live in one data center, the operational simplicity of a VPN may outweigh its security tradeoffs.
Zero-Trust Is the Right Choice When
- Your workforce is remote or hybrid, connecting from unmanaged devices
- You use SaaS applications like Salesforce, Slack, or Microsoft 365
- You operate under compliance frameworks like HIPAA, SOC 2, or NIST 800-207
- You’ve experienced a credential-based breach or phishing incident
- You need granular audit logs for every access event
The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) published its Zero Trust Maturity Model explicitly recommending zero-trust architecture for all federal agencies — a standard that has cascaded into private-sector best practices. If your organization handles sensitive health, financial, or personal data, ZTNA is no longer optional best practice — it is the regulatory expectation. For a practical starting point, our guide on building a personal digital security routine covers foundational steps that apply before any enterprise deployment.
Key Takeaway: Zero-trust is the correct choice for any organization with remote workers, cloud apps, or compliance obligations. CISA’s Zero Trust Maturity Model sets 5 distinct maturity pillars that apply directly to private-sector security programs, not just federal agencies.
What Does Implementing Zero-Trust Actually Require?
Zero-trust is not a single product — it is an architecture that spans identity, devices, networks, applications, and data. The transition from VPN to ZTNA requires planning, but it does not require ripping out everything at once.
Most organizations begin with identity and access management (IAM). Deploying multi-factor authentication (MFA) across all access points is the foundational step. Solutions like Okta, Microsoft Entra ID (formerly Azure AD), and Duo Security provide identity-centric gateways that integrate with ZTNA platforms. Understanding how credential theft enables access attacks is essential — our article on what spyware is and how to remove it from your phone covers how attackers harvest credentials at the device level.
Phased Migration Approach
A realistic migration runs in three phases: first, deploy MFA and inventory all access paths; second, pilot ZTNA for your highest-risk application group (typically remote admin tools); third, systematically decommission VPN segments as ZTNA coverage expands. This avoids operational disruption while progressively reducing VPN dependency.
Organizations should also audit their hardware attack surface during this process. Our guide on whether to use a hardware security key for your accounts explains how physical authentication tokens complement zero-trust identity verification. According to IBM’s Cost of a Data Breach Report 2024, organizations with mature zero-trust deployments experienced breach costs averaging $1.76 million less than those without zero-trust controls.
Key Takeaway: Zero-trust implementation is a phased architecture shift, not a single product swap. IBM’s 2024 data breach research shows organizations with mature ZTNA save an average of $1.76 million per breach compared to those relying on legacy perimeter security.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is zero-trust better than a VPN for remote work?
Yes, for most remote work environments, zero-trust network access is more secure than a VPN. ZTNA grants access to individual applications and continuously verifies trust, while VPNs grant broad network access after a single authentication event. For hybrid teams using cloud applications, ZTNA is the stronger choice.
Can you use both a VPN and zero-trust at the same time?
Yes, and many organizations run both during a migration period. A common approach is using ZTNA for cloud and SaaS application access while retaining a VPN for legacy on-premises systems that haven’t yet been onboarded to ZTNA. The goal is to reduce VPN usage over time, not maintain both indefinitely.
What is the main security weakness of a VPN?
The main weakness is implicit trust: once a user authenticates to a VPN, they typically gain broad access to the internal network. If credentials are stolen — through phishing or spyware — an attacker inherits that same broad access. This lateral movement capability is the core risk that zero-trust eliminates.
Is zero-trust expensive to implement?
ZTNA solutions typically cost between $100 and $200 per user per year, compared to $50–$100 for traditional VPN licensing. However, ZTNA reduces breach costs, lowers hardware overhead, and often simplifies compliance auditing. For most mid-size and enterprise organizations, the total cost of ownership is comparable or lower within three years.
Does zero-trust replace firewalls and VPNs entirely?
Zero-trust replaces the remote access function of VPNs but does not replace all network security tools. Firewalls still protect internal network segmentation. ZTNA specifically addresses the problem of granting remote users access to internal resources — it is one layer of a complete security stack, not a universal replacement.
Which companies offer the best zero-trust solutions in 2025?
Leading ZTNA vendors in 2025 include Zscaler, Cloudflare Access, Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access, Cisco Duo, and Microsoft Entra Private Access. The right choice depends on your existing cloud infrastructure, identity provider, and application environment. Organizations already on Microsoft 365 often find Entra ID integration the lowest-friction starting point.
Sources
- CISA — Zero Trust Maturity Model
- Cybersecurity Insiders — 2023 VPN Risk Report
- Zscaler — VPN Risk Report 2023
- IBM Security — Cost of a Data Breach Report 2024
- Gartner — Market Guide for Zero Trust Network Access
- NIST — Special Publication 800-207: Zero Trust Architecture
- Cloudflare — What Is Zero Trust Security?
