Article Details

Why native cloud security falls short. Your cloud security must stand alone. Partner Content As cloud adoption accelerates, many organizations are increasingly relying on the native security features offered by cloud service providers (CSPs). The ability to manage web application firewalls (WAF), data encryption, and key management (KMS) within a single provider ecosystem appears efficient and convenient. However, when security and reliability are viewed through the lens of enterprise risk management, this convenience may come at a significant cost. The main issues are vendor lock-in and single point of failure risk, structural vulnerabilities where one breakdown can compromise the entire system. Security coupled with infrastructure equals shared downtime Cloud-native WAF and encryption tools are deeply integrated into the provider's infrastructure, control console, policy engine, and update systems. While this tight integration may boost management efficiency during normal operations, it also introduces a critical vulnerability: if a failure occurs, both infrastructure and security services may go down simultaneously. One limitation of cloud-native security is the lack of control. Customers often have minimal influence over the timing, scope, or rollback process of updates. When patches are automatically pushed across all services, the update itself becomes a risk. This isn't just a technical problem; it’s a supply chain risk. The more centralized the security provider, the wider the impact radius of any failure. Ultimately, such dependencies constrain enterprise cloud strategies. The paradox of convenience: how native tools lead to lock-in Many companies express an interest in multi-cloud strategies, but security remains a major obstacle. CSP-native WAF and encryption features are tightly coupled to each provider's APIs and policies. This makes it difficult to migrate to other cloud platforms or on-premises environments without redesigning security frameworks from scratch. This process is costly and time-consuming, turning security into a barrier rather than a bridge to multi-cloud adoption. To overcome these structural limitations, enterprises need to decouple security controls from cloud infrastructure. This is where third-party WAF and encryption solutions become essential. The key is to logically separate the cloud infrastructure from security operations. For instance, third-party WAF solutions that support multi-cloud environments, such as Penta Security’s intelligent WAAP solution WAPPLES or the cloud-based SaaS Cloudbric WAF+, allow for consistent security even if a specific cloud infrastructure provider experiences an outage. These solutions play a decisive role in enhancing service resilience by separating security functions from specific infrastructure, which prevents localized failures from spreading across the entire network. Moreover, SaaS-based security offerings like Cloudbric WAF+ are particularly effective during cloud migrations. Because they can be deployed via a simple DNS change without the need for physical hardware installation, they minimize the security gaps that often occur during the transition to the cloud. The same logic applies to data encryption. Third-party encryption platforms enable independent key management, separate from the cloud provider. D.AMO, Penta Security's world-renowned encryption platform, offers flexible methods such as API, plug-in, kernel-level encryption that integrate with existing environments. This makes it possible to implement consistent encryption policies across multiple clouds and on-premises systems, supporting both multi-cloud adoption and disaster recovery (DR) strategies. This separation is even more critical in highly regulated industries. In financial services, public sector, and global business operations, data protection requirements are intensifying, with increasing scrutiny over who controls the encryption keys. Managing keys outside the cloud provider's environment mitigates insider threats and provides clear compliance and audit advantages. It's not just a technical choice but is a matter of trust and regulatory compliance. The strongest security is independent security Cloud-native security tools may seem cost-effective initially. However, when considering potential large-scale outages, regulatory failures, migration costs, and long-term pricing dependencies, the total cost of ownership is far more complex. Security should not be viewed as a cost-cutting target but as a critical investment to prevent cost escalations. While cloud infrastructure thrives on integration, core security controls should remain independent to maximize safety. WAF, data encryption, and key management are not peripheral tools. They are central to enterprise risk management. Relying solely on cloud-native security is a dangerous misconception. Separating security operations and diversifying dependencies is the smartest strategy for navigating today's cloud-first world. Contributed by Penta Security.