Keystrike vs Zero Networks Microsegmentation: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Keystrike

Mid-market and enterprise security teams protecting high-value remote access will find Keystrike's continuous cryptographic verification of physical user presence genuinely different from standard PAM tools; it stops attackers from pivoting through compromised credentials by proving the person at the keyboard is actually there. The platform's NIST PR.AA coverage reflects its strength in access control, paired with automated session revocation and workstation isolation that cut incident dwell time. This isn't for organizations with loosely managed remote access policies or those needing to retrofit zero trust across 50+ applications overnight; Keystrike works best when you've already identified which systems and users matter most.

Zero Networks Microsegmentation

Mid-market and enterprise teams struggling with lateral movement after breaches will find immediate value in Zero Networks Microsegmentation's automated policy generation, which cuts weeks off manual segmentation work and eliminates the blank-slate complexity that kills most microsegmentation projects. The platform's zero open ports architecture and identity-based access controls directly address NIST PR.AA by restricting logical asset access to authenticated users only, reducing your attack surface without requiring network redesign. Skip this if your organization lacks basic network visibility or identity hygiene; Zero Networks assumes you can feed it clean asset and user data to work with.