I. One Scenario, Three Security Paradoxes
An employee working from home connected to the company intranet through a VPN using a personal laptop, accessing the OA system, file server, and business database. They completed the day’s work, downloaded a customer document locally, and planned to continue processing it the next day. That night, their personal computer was infected with a Trojan, which scanned and uploaded all documents on the local disk. Three days later, the company’s security team discovered transaction information for this batch of customer data on an external threat intelligence platform.
This scenario is not extreme. It exposes three paradoxes of remote work security.
The first paradox: The more convenient the connection, the more uncontrollable the risk. VPN was originally designed to let remote users access the intranet as if they were in the office, but it assumes a premise: the connecting endpoint is trusted. When the endpoint is an employee’s personal computer, this premise no longer holds. A personal computer may be running pirated software, may be infected with a virus, may be shared with family members, or may not have any enterprise security client installed. The VPN gateway cannot judge these risks; it only recognizes account credentials.
The second paradox: The greater the access permissions, the wider the scope of data loss of control. Traditional VPNs typically grant “network-level” access permissions—once connected, users can access all intranet resources within their permission scope. This means employees can download files locally, take screenshots, copy to personal cloud drives, or send files out through instant messaging tools. The DLP, encryption, auditing, and other controls deployed by the enterprise in the office become completely ineffective on personal computers.
The third paradox: The security team cannot see, nor can it manage. Personal computers are not within the coverage of the enterprise endpoint management system, and the security team cannot know whether they are compliant, whether they are infected with viruses, or whether they are being remotely controlled. When a data leak incident occurs, the security team can confirm that “data was leaked” but cannot answer “from which device, through what method, and at what time the data flowed out.”
The popularization of remote work will not reverse, and the need for personal computers to access the intranet will not disappear. What enterprises need is not to “prohibit personal computers,” but a solution that can establish trusted access on untrusted endpoints, achieve data control in open networks, and maintain full-process auditing in distributed environments.
II. Ping64 Solution: From Connection to Governance
Ping64’s integrated office security platform does not simply replace VPN with another type of tunnel, but redefines the security model of remote access. Its core logic can be summarized in four statements:
- Dual verification of identity and device—before access, first confirm “who you are and whether your device is trusted”;
- Least privilege granted on demand—after access, only authorized resources can be accessed, not the entire intranet;
- Data does not land and does not spread—sensitive data is used in a controlled environment and cannot be retained on personal computers;
- Full-process behavior auditing—every access, every operation, and every file transfer is traceable.
Behind these four statements is the collaborative operation of multiple security modules within the Ping64 platform. They share the same data foundation, the same policy engine, and the same audit center, forming a complete governance closed loop from access to usage, and from use to tracing.
III. Before Access: Not Every Computer Can Connect
Ping64’s first step is to perform strict compliance verification before the remote endpoint connects to the intranet.
After employees install the Ping64 lightweight client on their personal computers, they initiate a remote access request. The system automatically checks the following compliance items: whether operating system patches meet baseline requirements, whether antivirus software is running and its virus database is up to date, whether high-risk software or non-compliant processes exist, whether the Ping64 client itself is running normally, and whether security configurations comply with enterprise policies.
Only when all compliance items meet the standard is the endpoint allowed to enter the access process. If the endpoint does not meet the trusted network rules, the system executes corresponding measures according to preset policies: for minor non-compliance, it can restrict access to only the remediation resource zone (such as patch servers and antivirus update servers) to guide the user through remediation; for severe non-compliance, it directly blocks access and alerts.
The capabilities at this layer share the same set of security baseline policies with the Ping64 endpoint security management module. Enterprises do not need to maintain a separate set of compliance check rules for remote access, but reuse existing endpoint security policies, reducing O&M complexity while ensuring policy consistency.
IV. After Access: Least Privilege, On-Demand Access
Traditional VPNs grant “network-level” permissions, while Ping64 grants “application-level” or “resource-level” permissions.
After employees pass identity verification and device compliance checks, Ping64 dynamically grants them permission to access specific resources based on factors such as their identity, role, department, and endpoint status. For example, finance personnel can only access the financial system, R&D personnel can only access the code repository and test environment, and outsourced personnel can only access designated collaboration directories. Employees cannot access unauthorized intranet resources, nor can they discover the intranet topology through scanning or probing.
This “least privilege” model is implemented based on Ping64’s unified identity management and policy engine. Enterprises can configure rules in the unified policy center for “who, under what conditions, can access which resources,” with one configuration taking effect across the entire network. When employees change positions or endpoint security status changes, access permissions are automatically adjusted without manual intervention by administrators.
More importantly, Ping64’s remote access capability is deeply linked with the data loss prevention module. When employees access sensitive resources, the system automatically identifies the file’s sensitivity level and triggers corresponding protection actions according to policies—encryption, watermarking, download restrictions, screenshot prohibition, and copy prohibition. Sensitive data is used in a controlled environment and cannot be retained on personal computers.
V. Data Does Not Land: Protecting Sensitive Information
The biggest data risk in remote work is that sensitive files are downloaded to personal computers and then lose control. Ping64’s “data does not land” capability allows employees to view and edit files normally, but files always remain in the enterprise’s controlled environment and do not leave copies on personal computers.
Specific implementation methods include:
- Controlled outbound format. Files are transmitted to remote endpoints in encrypted form and opened in the Ping64 controlled environment. Upon opening, it automatically connects to the verification server for identity verification and permission checks. Files cannot be saved as other formats, cannot be copied to the local disk, and cannot be leaked through screenshots or printing.
- Screen watermarking. During remote access, the screen automatically overlays watermarks containing employee identity information, access time, and endpoint identifiers. Even if employees photograph the screen with a phone, the watermark information can still be extracted for tracing and accountability.
- Clipboard control. Copying content from the controlled environment to the local clipboard is prohibited, preventing sensitive data from being taken out through copy-paste.
- Peripheral control. The use of USB storage devices, printers, Bluetooth, and other peripherals on personal computers is restricted, cutting off the physical channels for data outflow.
These capabilities do not operate in isolation. They share the same policy engine and user identity system with Ping64’s transparent document encryption, DLP, endpoint security management, and other modules. When employees trigger sensitive operations during remote access, the system can automatically execute a combined action of “block + alert + screen recording + notify administrator,” forming a real-time response closed loop.
VI. Full-Process Auditing: From “Having Logs” to “Having Evidence”
Security investigations in remote work scenarios often face a common dilemma: the enterprise can confirm that “data was leaked” but cannot answer “who took the data out, at what time, and through what method.” Ping64’s auditing capability restores remote access behavior into traceable, filterable, and reviewable audit events.
During remote access, Ping64 records information across the following dimensions:
Personnel dimension: Access initiator, identity information, department, and approval records (if approval is involved).
Device dimension: Endpoint identifier, device compliance status, operating system version, and client version.
Resource dimension: Target system accessed, file name, file fingerprint, and sensitivity level.
Behavior dimension: Operation behaviors such as opening, editing, copying, screenshotting, printing, and outbound transfer.
Channel dimension: Access method (VPN/Internet), transmission protocol, and data traffic.
Time dimension: Access start time, end time, and key operation timestamps.
This information is stored in association in the Ping64 unified audit center, forming a complete evidence chain. Administrators can enter an employee account or file fingerprint to simultaneously retrieve all relevant records for that employee or file—access records, operation logs, screen recordings, and file flow trajectories—without switching between multiple systems.
When a leak incident occurs, the security team can complete the entire process from incident discovery to responsibility identification within hours, rather than spending weeks piecing together logs as in traditional solutions.
VII. Comparison with Traditional VPN Solutions
VIII. From “Remote Connection” to “Remote Governance”
The normalization of remote work is forcing enterprises to rethink the security model of intranet access. Traditional VPN solves the problem of “whether a connection can be made,” but in scenarios where personal computers connect, enterprises more urgently need to solve the problems of “what can be done after connecting, what cannot be done, and how to trace what has been done.”
What the Ping64 integrated office security platform provides for remote work is precisely a complete solution from “connection” to “governance”: dual verification of identity and device to ensure trusted access, a least privilege model to limit access scope, data-does-not-land technology to protect sensitive information, and full-process auditing capability to support tracing and accountability. These capabilities operate collaboratively on the same platform, enabling enterprises to establish a complete security closed loop from endpoint to intranet, from access to auditing, without sacrificing remote work efficiency.
When office computers are no longer necessarily company assets, and when network boundaries are no longer clear, what enterprises need is not more complex VPN configurations, but an integrated platform that can extend security capabilities to every remote endpoint, every intranet access, and every data operation. This may be the most pragmatic response to the remote work era.
Contact
11 min 
