What are the main differences between cloud-native security and traditional security protection systems?

Cloud-native security and traditional security protection systems differ fundamentally in their design principles, deployment models, and threat mitigation approaches.

1. Architecture-Centric vs. Perimeter-Based Security

   • Traditional security relies on a perimeter defense model, focusing on securing the network boundary with firewalls, VPNs, and intrusion detection systems. It assumes threats originate externally.
   • Cloud-native security is architecture-centric, embedding security into every layer of the application stack (e.g., containers, microservices, serverless). It assumes breaches can occur anywhere, requiring zero-trust principles.

   Example: A traditional system might use a firewall to block external attacks, while a cloud-native approach enforces mutual TLS authentication between microservices, regardless of location.

2. Static vs. Dynamic Workloads

   • Traditional security struggles with dynamic environments, as it often requires manual configuration for IP-based access controls or static firewall rules.
   • Cloud-native security adapts to ephemeral workloads, leveraging automation and APIs to enforce policies dynamically. Tools like Kubernetes Network Policies or service meshes (e.g., Istio) secure communication between containers.

   Example: A serverless function spun up in seconds would bypass a traditional firewall but can be secured via cloud-native tools like Tencent Cloud’s Tencent Kubernetes Engine (TKE) Security Policies or Serverless Cloud Function (SCF) Role-Based Access Control (RBAC).

3. Shared Responsibility Model

   • Traditional security places full responsibility on the enterprise for infrastructure and application security.
   • Cloud-native security follows a shared responsibility model. The cloud provider secures the underlying infrastructure (e.g., hypervisors, physical servers), while users secure their applications, data, and configurations.

   Example: Tencent Cloud’s Cloud Security Center monitors vulnerabilities in virtual machines, but users must configure secrets management (e.g., Tencent Cloud Secrets Manager) for their applications.

4. Scalability and Automation

   • Traditional systems require manual scaling of security controls, leading to gaps during traffic spikes.
   • Cloud-native security integrates with CI/CD pipelines, enabling automated vulnerability scanning (e.g., Tencent Cloud Code Analysis) and policy enforcement at scale.

   Example: A containerized app deployed via Tencent Cloud Container Registry (TCR) can automatically scan images for vulnerabilities before deployment.

5. Visibility and Observability

   • Traditional security lacks granular visibility into microservices or serverless functions.
   • Cloud-native security provides real-time observability through distributed tracing (e.g., Tencent Cloud TKE Observability) and log aggregation to detect anomalies.

By adopting cloud-native security, organizations can address the unique challenges of modern architectures while leveraging scalable, automated, and integrated solutions like those offered by Tencent Cloud.