Unlocking Tension Between Security and Networking Teams With SASE: A Leadership Perspective on Balancing Performance and Safety

The demand for highly performant networks has risen exponentially as organizations seek to empower employees with fast, anywhere access to key applications. At the same time, the threat environment continues to escalate, and the consequences of breaches and disruption become increasingly severe. Networking teams are striving to deploy increasingly distributed, complex network solutions, and security teams are faced with the challenge of securing them.

Xalient’s latest research report ‘Why SASE is the Blueprint for Future-proofing Your Network in 2025 and Beyond’ reveals that gaps in organizational networks present a significant and persistent threat to security, with 90% of research participants reporting that emerging cybersecurity attack vectors are taking advantage of gaps in their network. With this dual challenge of performance and security to solve, both security and networking teams are turning to Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) in a bid to strengthen the security posture across a highly distributed environment and drive network performance through reduced latency. Correctly implemented, a SASE solution can address several aspects of both the networking and the security requirements with a single solution rather than a bolt-on approach, making it more secure and less complex.

However, choosing and implementing a SASE solution needs careful thought. There are multiple stakeholders involved with different – sometimes competing – objectives. Consequently, there is an important role for leaders in working with teams to discern the right approach to identifying requirements and vendors selection that balances the drivers, risks and barriers to achieve the best outcome for the business. SASE allows security and networking teams to address zero trust principles like least privileged access and micro segmentation by taking an identity-centric approach to connectivity.

Networking and Security Factors to Consider

Xalient’s recent research polled 700 organizations that have already implemented a SASE solution. They shared valuable insights into the issues they were seeking to solve and the benefits achieved.

Resolving performance issues and reducing latency for business-critical applications is the primary network-focused driver for exploring a SASE solution, pushing securing remote access for the hybrid workforce into second place. This reflects the fact that commercial pressures often outweigh security factors in decision-making. Implemented correctly, a SASE solution should solve both challenges and our research bore this out, with improved performance of business-critical apps cited as the top benefit following SASE implementation.

Businesses are also reporting concerns about the rising cost of traditional network architecture – this was a commonly cited driver for SASE adoption. We have reached a point where legacy networks are creaking under the strain of rising traffic and a greater number of remote workers. They are simply not resilient enough to support modern business structures and processes. Now that there is greater certainty around the shape and demands on networks following the pandemic upheaval, this is a good time to invest in a future-ready architecture.

From the security team’s perspective, key drivers include the secure remote access already mentioned. Fear of breach – including the regulatory, reputational and financial impacts – was another key stimulus and these two are closely linked, given that 44% of respondents said a recent breach had originated with a remote or hybrid worker.

Security teams also have strategic objectives in mind. Secure cloud adoption and migration was the third most-common driver for SASE adoption. This makes sense – SASE is typically delivered as Software-as-a-Service so it can seamlessly provide full zero trust access based on the identity of the device or entity. It can be combined with real-time context and security and compliance policies to solve another key challenge – that of securing the network without having to lock down large portions of it.

SASE implementation had answered many of these drivers for our research cohort, with many reporting that they had achieved strong threat protection without having to implement hardware and software upgrades. Being able to deliver consistent security policies was another notable advantage.

Leaders who are working to devise the right SASE approach can usefully conduct their own research among network and security stakeholders to identify the drivers that are specific to their business and ensure they are effectively addressed by the chosen solution approach. This is important because our study showed that the advantages differ depending on whether a multi-vendor or single-vendor solution is chosen.

Single- or multi-vendor SASE selection?

There are various pros and cons associated with single vendor versus multi-vendor SASE solutions. Our survey showed that those who had implemented a muti-vendor solution were more likely to report improved performance of business-critical apps than those who had adopted a single vendor approach. However, they raised concerns about the complexity of managing multiple vendors and lack of clarity on pricing.

On the other hand, single-vendor environments were associated with a more predictable return on investment, but challenges included controls not being as effective or configurable compared with a multi-vendor solution and vendor lock-in.

These pros and cons must be weighed in light of the network and security teams’ priorities and bandwidth. If performance improvements are non-negotiable, it may be prudent to opt for a multi-vendor solution but ensure that there is enough resource – either internal or externally provided – to support and manage it. If ROI is the strongest driver, a single-vendor solution may be the best option, but more work may be needed to configure controls.

SASE is often deployed in phases, which is a prudent approach, however the selection shouldn’t be made based on the first component to be deployed. It’s important to consider requirements from both a network AND security perspective to ensure the end goal encapsulates the outcomes you want to achieve across both domains. Another common challenge we see is complexity; organizations have tens of monitoring tools in place with the associated alert fatigue. One objective SASE can address for all stakeholders is reducing complexity and thereby improving visibility.

What’s right for one business may be wrong for the next, what leaders must do is ensure they have a complete picture from all stakeholders, and a sound understanding of what SASE offers in its different guises, before making the critical decision. Then the challenge is communicating back to stakeholders how the solution will solve their issues and set them up for a simpler, more secure, and more performant future system. This should unlock the tension and get teams working together to drive the business forward. This is where working with an experienced managed service provider that has undertaken multiple SASE implementations could help the organization determine what SASE solution is right for their requirements and provide leaders with the right balance of performance and security for the business.

About the Author

Stephen Amstutz is a results-driven, hardworking professional, capable of understanding complex matters outside his area of direct expertise. He has over 20 years’ experience in design, implementation, and support of various IT infrastructures. Stephen is responsible for all technical pre-sales for Xalient. This involves designing a whole, end-to-end solution to meet the customer’s needs, potentially including everything from networks and server infrastructure to applications and business processes.

Stephen can be reached online at [email protected] and at our company website https://xalient.com/