Think Your Data Stack Is Safe? Here’s Why VPNs Aren’t Enough

Plenty of organizations assume their data stack is secure simply because it’s gated behind a VPN. That assumption feels logical. Limit access to trusted IP addresses, encrypt traffic, and create a protective barrier between company data and the outside world. It’s an approach that worked when data lived on internal servers, behind office walls, protected by physical firewalls and carefully controlled networks. The problem is, that world is gone.

Modern data isn’t confined to private networks. It lives in cloud warehouses like Snowflake, flows through browser-based tools like Sigma, and is accessed daily by teams working from home, on the road, or anywhere with an internet connection. In this setup, the VPN gate doesn’t stand between sensitive data and potential risk; it simply fences off a network that no longer contains the data itself.

The hard truth is that VPNs protect networks, not data behavior. Once someone connects, the VPN has no visibility into what they do next. It can’t control which datasets are accessed, how they’re combined, or whether sensitive information ends up in an exported file or shared dashboard. This blog post examines why relying on VPNs for BI security creates blind spots, how modern BI workflows often bypass these controls entirely, and what a secure analytics strategy should look like today.

How we got here: Why VPNs became the default for data security

For years, VPNs were the gold standard for protecting company systems. When infrastructure lived on-premises, this model made perfect sense. Users needed to be on the network to access internal tools, and the network itself was the security boundary. Early BI followed the same pattern. Tools were desktop-based, data lived on local servers, and IT teams mediated access. VPNs extended that security perimeter to remote employees, letting them connect to the internal network as if they were in the office.

When organizations started migrating to cloud warehouses, many carried that same network-first mindset forward. Instead of rethinking security, they applied VPN requirements to cloud platforms as a way to “lock” them down, treating cloud data as if it still lived behind a firewall.

For a while, it worked well enough. However, the workflows changed more rapidly than the security models did. BI tools were moved to the browser, API-based connections replaced direct database queries, and data users included business users, marketers, and operators who accessed data directly without routing it through IT. The perimeter disappeared, but the VPN stayed.

The illusion of safety: What a data VPN protects

A VPN encrypts network traffic. It verifies whether someone can connect to a company’s internal network or a set of approved IP addresses, encrypting that traffic to keep it hidden from external observers while blocking outsiders from accessing private resources. That’s where its job ends. The moment a user passes the VPN gate, it stops asking questions. It won’t flag if a dashboard accidentally exposes employee salaries or financial forecasts to someone who shouldn’t have access to them.

A VPN is the digital equivalent of unlocking the front door to a building. Once someone steps inside, the VPN has no control over which offices they enter, what files they open, or what documents they carry out. This is the fundamental flaw in applying VPN thinking to modern analytics. It governs connection, not usage. It protects the pathway to the data warehouse, not the data. To be clear, VPNs and services like private endpoints, VPC peering, or Snowflake PrivateLink still play a role in securing the network pathway to cloud warehouses. But none of these controls what happens inside the BI tool once a user is authenticated.

The BI security gap no one talks about

The problem with VPN-based security becomes even more apparent when you consider how business intelligence has evolved. It wasn’t that long ago that data was a back-office function, managed by IT or a dedicated data team. Access was limited, requests came in, reports were generated, and very few people ever directly handled raw data. That world is gone.

Modern BI has decentralized access entirely. Data isn’t just the domain of analysts and engineers anymore. Teams across the business have direct access to data. Marketing pulls customer segments on demand, operations monitors supply chain performance as it changes, and finance models revenue scenarios without waiting for a data extract. 

Product managers explore usage patterns through web-based interfaces that operate entirely outside the traditional corporate network. This shift is the inevitable result of how companies now operate. Cloud warehouses, such as Snowflake and BigQuery, have made it possible to store massive amounts of data with virtually no hardware constraints. BI platforms, such as Sigma, made that data instantly available to non-technical users through simple, browser-based interfaces. The goal was clear; remove bottlenecks, give teams direct access, and speed up decision-making.

But here’s the tradeoff few people saw coming. When you remove the barriers to access, you also remove the built-in controls that used to come with them. Without the right controls within the BI platform, companies face risks they may not even realize they have. Sensitive data can easily end up in the wrong hands because the firewall was never meant to control what happens after login. Dashboards get shared, CSVs get downloaded, and data lineage disappears the moment someone exports a file to analyze offline.

The bigger risk isn’t unauthorized users breaking in; it’s authorized users having far more access than they should. A junior analyst might only need aggregated customer churn numbers, but ends up with row-level data that includes personally identifiable information because the system was never designed to determine whether that level of access was necessary. These are everyday risks that often go unnoticed within most modern BI workflows.

Why zero-trust fits the modern data world

The security model that works now isn’t perimeter-based. It’s identity-based, behavior-aware, and continuously verified. The problem with VPN-based security is that it answers the wrong question. It focuses on where someone connects from rather than who they are, what they should access, and how they use data once they’re in. Zero-trust flips that model. It operates on a simple principle: no user, device, or system is automatically trusted just because it connects to a network. Trust is earned continuously based on identity, context, and behavior, not location.

A zero-trust framework asks: Who is this user? What role do they serve? Does this context justify the data they’re accessing? It keeps asking throughout every session. Permissions become dynamic, tied to roles and responsibilities. A finance analyst can query revenue data but not HR records. A marketing contractor sees campaign metrics but not customer details. Access is no longer about network presence; it’s about whether the user’s identity matches the sensitivity of the data. It doesn’t stop at access control.

Zero-trust continuously monitors behavior. If a user suddenly pulls datasets they’ve never touched before or downloads more than usual, the system can flag it or restrict access. VPNs simply aren’t built to do this. For data leaders, the real advantage is visibility. Zero-trust provides a detailed record of who accessed which datasets, how they transformed the data, and whether those actions aligned with policy. This shifts security from reactive firefighting to proactive governance. This is the security model BI now demands.

What to look for in a secure BI platform

If the old security model no longer holds up, the right question is “How do we secure data where it lives and how it’s used?” For data leaders, the answer isn’t swapping one tool for another; it’s choosing a platform built for how data is accessed and shared now. Security can’t depend on where someone logs in; it has to operate at the data level. This is where modern BI tools separate from legacy systems. A secure platform locks the front door and controls every room inside.

Granular access controls that go beyond logins

Access has to go deeper than “Can this person log in?” to include governing tables, columns, and even rows. A sales manager should view revenue dashboards without seeing customer support dat,a and a finance analyst might access expense records but not employee health details. Rigid, role-based permissions aren’t enough. Permissions need to flex as responsibilities shift. The platform should support policies that adapt based on team, geography, project involvement, or even temporary assignments.

Visibility that follows data everywhere

A secure BI tool makes data usage transparent. You should be able to answer questions like:

• Who ran this query?
• What filters or joins did they apply?
• Where did that data go? Into a dashboard, a CSV, or an external share?

When this visibility is missing, governance fails quietly in the background, and it becomes impossible to manage risk.

Monitoring that tracks more than logins

Some risks are purely accidental, such as when someone shares a report without realizing it contains restricted information. Other times, it’s a simple mistake, such as a query that accidentally pulls sensitive data because the wrong table was joined. 

The platform should capture what users did after they logged in. Did they export data? Did they join datasets they normally wouldn’t? Did they access fields outside their role? This is less about surveillance and more about preventing accidental exposure and ensuring accountability.

Built-in governance

Governance must reside within the BI platform. Relying on external controls, like VPNs or firewall rules, assumes that the network boundary still matters, which it no longer does. When governance travels with the data, it applies equally whether someone logs in from the office, home, or anywhere else. Some BI tools were designed this way from the start. Others try to retrofit perimeter-based thinking into a cloud-native world. The difference becomes obvious the moment you start asking how access, visibility, and governance work under the hood.

Rethinking your BI security strategy

BI security isn’t a network problem anymore. It’s a data problem that requires tools and thinking designed for the way data is accessed and shared today. Network protections, such as VPNs and private endpoints, still matter for administrative systems and warehouse connections. But securing data behavior inside BI requires governance models designed for how users interact with data, not just how they connect to it. The organizations that recognize this shift will be the ones that stay in control of their data wherever it travels.

VPN in data analytics: Frequently asked questions

What is a data VPN, and how is it different from a regular VPN?

There’s no technical difference. A “data VPN” just refers to using VPNs to control access to cloud data. The technology is the same, but the use case has shifted.

Can VPNs fully secure cloud-based BI tools?

No. VPNs limit who can connect, but they have no control over what happens inside a BI tool or warehouse after that connection is made.

Why are zero-trust models better for BI?

Zero-trust secures the data and restricts access based on identity, context, and behavior, not just network presence. It governs who can see what, how it’s used, and when access should be revoked or restricted.

How do I know if my BI stack has security blind spots?

If you rely primarily on VPNs or have overly broad permissions, lack lineage tracking, or can’t answer questions about who accessed what data, there are gaps.

Should I stop using VPNs if I adopt zero-trust?

Not necessarily. VPNs still have a role in securing access to internal systems, administrative consoles, or legacy tools that aren’t cloud-native. They’re helpful for network-level protections, but should no longer be the primary defense for data workflows.

What should I look for in a secure BI tool?

Granular permissions, detailed lineage tracking, activity monitoring, and governance are built directly into the platform.

‍