A strategic blueprint
for zero trust standardization and efficiency

 

Federal agencies have made substantial progress in advancing zero trust (ZT) security since Executive Order 14028, “Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity,” was issued in 2021. The Order accelerated government-wide movement toward stronger cyber hygiene, improved software supply chain protections, and modernized security architectures. In response, agencies developed structured zero trust implementation roadmaps aligned with guidance from NIST’s SP 800-207 guidance and correctly leveraged the CISA Zero Trust Maturity Model to benchmark their progress across identity, devices, networks, applications, and data. 

To support this work, agencies established essential governance structures, most notably zero trust program management offices, to coordinate enterprise-wide planning and execution. Early implementation milestones focused on tangible, high-impact security controls such as deploying phishing-resistant multi-factor authentication, maturing fine-grained access control policies, and centralizing authoritative identity attributes within enterprise identity providers.  

Five years later, significant work remains across all pillars of ZTA.  Although the identity pillar is where many agencies made their earliest, most visible gains, the journey doesn’t end with achieving strong identity controls. Between 2024 and 2026, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Government Accountability Office, and federal surveys consistently reported that while U.S. federal agencies have made progress on Zero Trust, large portions remained in early maturity stages and had not yet achieved advanced Zero Trust capabilities.  

 

Large federal departments in particular continue to grapple with the complexities of harmonizing diverse bureaus, sub-agencies, and Components under a unified, standardized approach. Their ability to achieve zero trust at scale is hampered by persistent ZTA gaps, particularly in segmentation across data, networks, and applications as well as enterprise-wide visibility and standardization. 

That’s why they need a practical blueprint to advance consistent, achievable zero trust initiatives and drive cost‑efficient standardization across their Components. Our experience consistently shows that individual Components within a department can increase operational efficiency and reduce cybersecurity costs by leveraging standards, all without sacrificing the autonomy and direct oversight required to support mission-unique systems and processes.  

Structural risks of non-standardized ZTA 

Standardization doesn’t constrain innovation or require bureaus to relinquish oversight and control to centralized headquarters operations. It provides an interoperable foundation that allows each Component to implement solutions tailored to distinct mission requirements, risk tolerance, and operational realities. 

One of the foremost challenges for large departments has been achieving departmentwide standardization in zero trust technologies. One Component may pursue a zero trust network access (ZTNA) solution while another Component within the same department with a smaller cybersecurity budget is prioritizing a centralized identity provider, or different products entirely. The result is a set of structural risks that undermine both security and efficiency through: 

• Operational complexity. Having multiple ZTA tools results in differing support structures, inconsistent policies, and different monitoring workflows. 
• Policy enforcement gaps. Inconsistent tooling leads to uneven enforcement of trust evaluation, access controls, and device posture checks. 
• Increased attack surface. Divergence from standards increases variances that attackers can exploit. 
• Procurement inefficiencies. Consolidated purchasing and licensing strategies become impossible without alignment. Tool diversity, once thought essential for maintaining flexibility and autonomy, now simply increases ownership costs over time. When divergent acquisition strategies fail to leverage economies of scale such as negotiated enterprise license agreements, they create backlogs in already slow ATO processes for new tools. 

These risks underscore the need for product standardization to be a foundational requirement. Without a defined set of standards, zero trust can’t effectively scale or be accurately measured across a large enterprise. And maintaining it as a standalone effort risks separating it from the broader IT and security operations it’s meant to strengthen. To be sustainable, ZTA standards and functions must be embedded into the broader IT and security ecosystem. 

For example, deploying cloud-based services that use APIs is important to cloud migration efforts and operations, but without monitoring tools that can discover APIs in real time as cloud traffic increases, visibility into ongoing IT transformations is reduced. While applying a single set of security controls everywhere across the enterprise isn’t practical or recommended, embedding a foundational set of zero trust reference standards into normal design and implementation allows for standardized policy enforcement. 

A scalable operational model 

Achieving true zero trust maturity across a large federal department requires more than isolated progress or individual Component-level advancements. It demands a unified, standards-driven approach built collaboratively across all parts of the organization. An empowered governance body is essential to drive consistency across Components. Correctly designed, it reduces friction by turning standardization into shared governance instead of top-down direction.

The work ahead involves tackling deeper challenges across segmentation, visibility, and harmonization of diverse environments. Standardizing the technology stack through a consensus-built reference architecture, consistent governance, and shared product standards remains the most effective way to reduce operational complexity, strengthen enforcement, and lower long-term costs. 

3 key steps for maturing department-wide zero trust 

1. Establish enterprise-wide standardization by: 

• Standardizing the broader stack. Establish a department-wide reference ZTA developed with the active participation and agreement of Component IT leaders to produce a consensus-driven framework rather than a top-down mandate.  
• Providing no-cost or partially funded solutions for initial rollout at smaller Components that lack the resources to independently launch new zero trust initiatives. Pair them with technical assistance and prioritized support for early adopters. Incentives like this can reduce the perception that centralization is burdensome. 
• Driving enforcement through governance. Use governance to formalize and reinforce shared zero trust architecture by designating agreed-upon product and service standards. Provide clear guidance while preserving flexibility for Components to implement according to their distinct operational needs and include a governance model for IoT and non-standard device onboarding. This reduces complexity, decreases long-term costs, and accelerates adoption. 

2. Institutionalize zero trust into operations to optimize sustainability by: 

• Shifting responsibility from a standalone program to operational teams 
• Integrating principles into budgeting, acquisition, and system design. Operational teams must see zero trust as a core design requirement for networks, access provisioning, data security, and asset management. 
• Embedding zero trust criteria into risk scoring 
• Measuring progress through operational metrics, not programmatic reporting 

3. Establish a zero trust governance board with real authority by: 

• Creating a department-wide zero trust steering committee chaired by the CIO/CISO 
• Including Component CIOs/CISOs and mission leadership 
• Establishing defined voting or decision authorities 
• Requiring governance board oversight of zero trust standards for use by all Components 
• Hosting cross-Component working groups to share lessons learned 

With empowered governance structures, cross-Component collaboration, and a commitment to shared, flexible standards, departments can accelerate adoption, reduce fragmentation, and enable each Component to operate more efficiently. Then zero trust becomes not just a cybersecurity mandate but a scalable operational model.