Voltar 
Co-authored by Joe DePalo and Jason Clark
You’ve probably heard at one point or another the cliché that the internet is broken. It’s no secret that the underlying infrastructure that businesses around the world use to access cloud applications and data is flawed and wasn’t built with today’s scale in mind. That puts IT security leaders in a tough position because there’s a penalty for deploying security tools, in the form of increased latency. Traffic is backhauled for inspection, which slows down workflows and creates issues for all executives who sit outside of the security organization. The trade-off many businesses unfortunately make is to bury their heads in the sand and choose performance over security, which results in their sensitive data leaking out of the organization like water through a sieve.
A big part of the problem is that the internet was never designed to be a secure network in the first place. When Department of Defense officials laid the groundwork for ARPANET, the internet’s precursor, they envisioned it as a way to link up a relatively small number of government and academic research centers. They didn’t expect that criminals, nation-states, or activist hackers would eventually try to steal information sent through the pipes. So even though security wasn’t baked into the system, the internet continued to grow — from big, centralized computers at universities to your laptop, smartphone, and a connected thermostat.
Infrastructural Flaws and Challenges to Change
Why have companies accepted a system not suited to their needs? One reason is that it’s convenient. Some businesses are more than willing to discount the risk of cyberattacks in favor of less friction for users if there isn’t an obvious alternative. Others, like the financial services or defense sector, are more regulated and have a “security-first” mindset and end up backhauling traffic at the expense of the user experience.
Another reason is that vendors, for years, have told companies that these security and user experience tradeoffs are just baked into the rules. They can offer you better tires and new brakes (hardware refresh time!), but they can’t change the fact that you’re driving in an outdated car. And because they’ve built and promoted this broken system, they have little incentive to replace it with something new that will end up cannibalizing the solutions they’ve been hyping for years.
By now, the internet has been woven into every aspect of our cultural and economic life. It’s used by businesses around the globe — yours included — to access everything from mission-critical applications to blog posts. It probably seems unthinkable to rip it up and replace it with something new. But there is a better solution out there in the form of a distributed network architecture that doesn’t force companies to choose between speed and security. Think of it as relying on a dedicated version of the internet that allows you to keep hackers away and your data secure, while allowing you to maintain a fast round-trip time that your employees and customers require. To take the car analogy a little further, instead of making small tweaks here and there to your beater, you can sub out the whole vehicle for a Formula 1 race car. Instead of accepting that we have to operate on a crummy playing field, it needs to be changed out entirely.
In the coming years, security teams will either switch to this new model or get left behind, because few will want to keep pitting speed against security when they need to have both.
One challenge, of course, is that it wouldn’t make sense for individual companies to build out their own private, carrier-grade networks. And in today’s ecosystem, network operators have little reason to provide such an alternative. The carrier that provides you internet access doesn’t make more money if you use their services more often. In fact, they actually lose money if you and everyone else are constantly downloading large files and streaming videos because it blows up their cost models. In essence, they have no incentive to build out their infrastructure to anything more than the bare minimum.
Cloud providers, on the other hand, have an incentive to make their internal networks run smoothly, but they don’t have a reason to make it easy for customers to get in and out fast. Think of them like casinos — they make the most money when people don’t leave, so they hide the exits. If cloud providers had fast performant access in and out of their networks it would allow customers to use multiple cloud providers, or even use customer-owned data centers. Cloud providers do not want that! They are very content with you leaving all your work in the cloud. The result for businesses is unworkable round-trip delays and that get worse the further you are from the core of their networks
To sum it up, the carriers and cloud providers have no motivation to solve the performance vs. security trade-off dilemma that all enterprises face with today’s internet because they know it’s too expensive and difficult for them to build their own interconnected environment.
How Netskope is Solving the Problem
The gap is obvious, but until now no one had the incentive to fill the void. At Netskope, we believe it’s time for security innovators to step in. With the explosion of shadow IT and applications that can be directly accessed by employees and customers, security is becoming a leading force in the evolution of the internet and how companies stay connected.
So we’ve decided to take control of our own destiny and build out our own private infrastructure; one where we can implement strong security controls while at the same time be able to touch eve