Which statement is consistent with the idea of 'Death of the perimeter'?

• A. A completely secure network can be achieved with enough controls
• B. Perimeter defense alone is sufficient
• C. No security measures are necessary
• D. A completely secure network is impossible

Answer: (D)

The idea of the death of the perimeter is that a network boundary alone can’t be trusted to keep threats out. In today’s environments, users, devices, and services are everywhere—cloud apps, partner networks, remote workers, mobile devices, and supply chains mean that traffic and data cross boundaries constantly. Breaches can occur from inside the border as easily as from outside, so assuming a flawless, fortress-like perimeter isn’t realistic.

That’s why the most accurate statement is that a completely secure network is impossible. You design for resilience instead: assume breaches will happen and protect with layered defenses, zero-trust principles, and continuous monitoring. This includes defense in depth, network segmentation, least-privilege access, strong authentication, encryption, and ongoing risk assessment.

Relying on the perimeter alone isn’t sufficient because perimeter controls can be bypassed or undermined by insiders, compromised devices, or trusted third parties. The idea that no security measures are necessary is clearly false, and thinking you can achieve complete security with more perimeter controls contradicts the need for broader, ongoing protection.