Topic starter
24/10/2026 8:51 pm
TL;DR: Lateral movement through east-west traffic carries much of the risk in cloud-native, IoT, OT, and IoMT environments, Asimily reports. Internal segmentation and visibility now determine how far a foothold can spread across connected systems.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Asimily: “East-West Cyberattacks and How They Work”.
Key questions
Q: Why does east-west traffic increase breach impact in IoT and OT environments?
A: IoT and OT devices often lack agents, patch flexibility, and strong native controls, so internal access can persist without much resistance.
Q: What are the signs that internal traffic monitoring is failing?
A: Warning signs include incomplete device inventories, unknown internal flows, encrypted traffic that cannot be classified, and segmentation policies that do not match real communication patterns.
Q: What breaks when organisations do not segment east-west traffic?
A: When east-west traffic is not segmented, a single compromise can spread across workloads, applications, and devices much more easily.
Practitioner guidance
- Map east-west communication paths first Build an inventory of which devices, services, and workloads exchange internal traffic, then identify the paths that should not exist for each segment.
- Segment by device class and trust zone Separate IoT, OT, IoMT, and IT assets into distinct zones so one compromised device cannot freely reach unrelated systems.
- Use passive discovery for unmanaged devices Rely on passive and protocol-based discovery where agents are not practical, especially for OT and medical devices that cannot tolerate disruption.
Bottom line: East-west traffic turns internal trust into a security boundary that attackers can exploit once they gain a foothold.
Glossary terms: East-west traffic, Lateral Movement, Network Segmentation, Blast Radius
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
This topic was modified 7 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group
25/10/2026 11:12 am
East-west exposure is a governance problem, not just a networking problem. The article shows that once traffic is internal, traditional edge-centric security assumptions stop holding. In identity terms, the real issue is how much internal trust a compromised account, service, or device can inherit before it is detected. Practitioners should treat internal authorization scope as a containment control, not a back-office detail.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How should security teams contain east-west movement without breaking operations?
A: Use behaviour-based segmentation, simulate policy changes before enforcement, and set containment boundaries around operationally meaningful zones. The goal is to reduce blast radius while preserving uptime, safety, and legitimate internal workflows across IT, OT, and IoMT estates.
👉 Read our full editorial: East-west traffic exposure widens lateral movement risk in OT networks
This post was modified 7 days ago by NHI Mgmt Group