Remote Access vs Attack Surface
Remote access enables modern business operations but must be governed continuously. RegulatoryTRIZ resolves this contradiction by combining flexible access with risk-based security controls that preserve both operational continuity and cybersecurity.
CyberTRIZ analysis · Regulatory contradiction R076 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Remote work, cloud services, and distributed operations require employees, contractors, and suppliers to access organizational resources from multiple locations and devices. While remote access increases business flexibility, every external connection expands the organization's exposure to cyber threats.
Conflict
Expanding remote access improves operational flexibility but increases the attack surface. Restricting remote access improves security but limits business continuity and workforce mobility.
Regulatory Obligations
Secure remote access
Authenticate users strongly
Monitor remote sessions
Restrict privileged access
Review remote access permissions
Risks
Reduced workforce flexibility
Operational disruption
Unauthorized remote access
Increased cyber exposure
Recommended Controls
Implement Zero Trust principles, strong authentication, device verification, encrypted communications, and continuous monitoring. Remote access should be granted according to business need and continuously evaluated based on risk.
Evidence
Remote Access Policy
VPN or Zero Trust Configuration
Access Logs
Remote Access Reviews
Audit Questions
Is remote access protected by strong authentication?
Are remote sessions monitored?
Are remote access permissions reviewed regularly?
Suggested Kpis
Percentage of remote users protected by MFA
Number of unauthorized remote access attempts
Percentage of remote access reviews completed