For MSPs, VPN replacement has moved from a roadmap item to an urgent operational decision. The architecture that secured remote access for the past two decades is now one of the most actively exploited entry points in the SMB threat landscape.
The core problem is structural. VPNs were built for a world where users sat close to a central data center and remote access was occasional. That world is gone. Clients work from home, hotels, coffee shops, and branch offices spread across multiple time zones. Is VPN still performant or secure enough to handle the load? Traditional infrastructure wasn’t designed to operate at this capacity, enforce modern security controls, nor integrate with a cloud-first application stack.
The failure is not subtle. MSPs see it in the ticket queue every week: dropped connections, slow application performance, users who have quietly stopped connecting to the VPN because the experience is too painful to bother with.
A VPN that users bypass is a glaring risk. When employees connect directly from unsecured networks to SaaS applications, cloud storage, or internal systems without the VPN, they operate entirely outside the visibility and enforcement boundary it provides. MSPs lose the ability to monitor, log, or block activity they cannot see.
Performance issues drive this behavior. VPNs backhaul all traffic through a central chokepoint like a data center, a headquarters appliance, or a hosted server. Every user who connects adds latency. Every mile between the user and that central point compounds the problem. Routing traffic from a remote employee, through a central server, and then back out to a cloud application running in a completely different region is genuinely inefficient. Users feel it immediately, and they adapt by working around the tool.
Split tunneling is the standard workaround. Send corporate traffic through the VPN and let everything else go direct. Performance improves, but visibility drops further and the attack surface expands. Choosing between performance and security doesn’t solve the problem, and in the process, highlights others.
The vulnerability record on major VPN platforms is consistent and damning. High-severity CVEs targeting appliances from well-known enterprise vendors have been exploited in the wild, often at scale, before organizations had time to apply patches. Ransomware operators and nation-state groups actively scan for unpatched VPN infrastructure because it sits at the network edge and, when compromised, hands over authenticated access with minimal friction.
A few examples illustrate the pattern clearly.
For MSPs managing VPN infrastructure across dozens of clients at varying patch levels, that exposure multiplies. Any unpatched appliance on a client network is a viable entry point. Staying ahead of that across an entire client base is an unsustainable operational burden.
The security model compounds the problem further. VPNs authenticate a user once and then grant broad network access. There is no inspection of what moves through the encrypted tunnel, no verification of device health at connection time, and no enforcement of least-privilege access once a session is established. A compromised credential does not just expose one application. It exposes the entire network segment that user could reach, which in a typical SMB flat network is most of it.
Attackers understand this. Credential stuffing attacks, phishing campaigns, and dark web credential markets all target VPN access specifically because the return on a single valid login is high. MSPs need a VPN alternative for the businesses they serve.
Zero trust network access (ZTNA) operates from an opposite assumption. Nothing is trusted by default: not the user, not the device, not the network the connection originates from. Access requires verification of identity, validation of device posture, and evaluation of context. Once granted, access is scoped to the specific resource the user needs through the principle of least privilege.
The security difference from a VPN is concrete. A stolen credential in a ZTNA environment does not give an attacker broad network access. Access is limited to only the resources that specific user was authorized to reach, and only if the device also passes posture checks. Lateral movement is constrained at the architectural level before any firewall rule or network policy has a chance to fail.
Device posture verification means unmanaged endpoints, personal devices without endpoint protection, or machines that have not received recent security updates get blocked at the authentication layer. MSPs can enforce consistent endpoint standards across all clients without layering in additional tooling to cover what the access control mechanism should be doing natively.
Session-level logging gives security teams visibility into user activity after authentication. Not just a record that a login succeeded, but a log of what resources were accessed, when, from where, and from what device. That data is the foundation of any real detection and response capability for remote access events.
If ZTNA is the approach that replaces VPNs, Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) is the platform that delivers it.
SASE is a cloud-native architecture that converges network connectivity and security enforcement into a single platform. Through secure web gateway, DNS security, URL and content filtering, threat inspection, and other capabilities, SASE provides a consolidated framework for enforcing ZTNA and replacing VPNs across an entire client base.
Unlike location-bound VPNs, SASE operates from a distributed network of cloud points of presence (PoPs) deployed across multiple regions globally. Rather than routing all user traffic to a single central appliance, each connection is directed to the nearest PoP. The result is that a field technician in Phoenix, a remote accountant in Tampa, and a contractor working overseas all get low-latency connections routed through regional infrastructure, not a single chokepoint in a data center that might be two time zones away.
Security services run inline at those PoPs. Traffic gets inspected and policies get enforced before the connection reaches its destination, regardless of where the user is or what network they are on. Threat inspection, DNS filtering, and web gateway controls are not optional add-ons applied after the fact. They are structural components of every connection.
For MSPs, the multi-tenant operational model is where SASE separates itself from any VPN-based approach. A single control plane manages policies across every client. Adding a new client means configuring access policies, not provisioning and hardening new infrastructure. Responding to a security event means pulling logs from one console. Adjusting access for a new hire, a contractor, or a terminated employee is a policy change applied immediately across the platform, not a manual process across multiple systems.
Three forces have converged to move VPN replacement for small business from a theoretical discussion to an active buying decision.
MSPs who can demonstrate that SASE addresses compliance requirements across these frameworks have a concrete differentiator when competing for clients in regulated industries.
Migration from VPN to SASE does not require a weekend maintenance window or a single high-risk cutover. A phased approach keeps existing access intact while the new environment is validated.
Every client still running a legacy VPN is carrying a known and documented risk. The vulnerabilities are public and the attack patterns well established. Threat actors aren’t sitting around while MSPs finish their evaluation cycles, and if a client is attacked, the ramifications and downstream costs are steep. The time to act is now.
SASE is production-ready, deployed at scale, and available through MSP-focused platforms built specifically for the multi-tenant, multi-client operational model that defines managed services. It’s the business VPN alternative that addresses the security, performance, and operational concerns MSPs are looking to address.
The MSPs winning the remote access security conversation with clients are the ones who can walk in with a clear explanation of why the current tool is failing and a concrete path to something better. That conversation starts with understanding what SASE delivers and why the VPN era is over.
See How SASE Works as a VPN Replacement for MSPs
Ready to move clients off legacy VPN infrastructure? See how a SASE platform built for MSPs delivers zero trust network access, consistent security enforcement, and the multi-tenant management model your team needs to scale.
Read our eBook, SASE Explained, to see how you can use SASE to modernize your network security with ZTNA,
No, not reliably. The vulnerability record on major VPN platforms shows consistent, high-severity CVEs that ransomware operators and nation-state groups exploit at scale. Beyond the patching problem, the core security model is flawed: a single valid credential grants broad network access with no device posture check and no least-privilege enforcement. Patching addresses individual vulnerabilities. It does not fix the underlying architecture.
A VPN authenticates a user once and grants broad access to the network segment behind it. ZTNA verifies identity, validates device posture, and evaluates context before granting access. That access is scoped to the specific resource the user needs, not the entire network. A compromised credential under ZTNA does not hand over the network. Under a VPN, it often does.
SASE is a cloud-native platform that converges network connectivity and security enforcement. It replaces VPN infrastructure by routing user traffic to the nearest cloud point of presence rather than backhauling it through a central appliance. Security controls including secure web gateway, DNS security, and ZTNA run inline at those PoPs. The result is faster performance, consistent enforcement, and no hardware to patch or maintain.
Migration does not require a cutover event. New users enroll directly into the SASE platform first, giving MSPs time to validate and refine policies against real usage before existing users transition. High-risk users with broad access or administrative credentials move first to reduce blast radius early. Once all users are enrolled and policies are stable, the VPN infrastructure decommissions entirely.
Yes. Cyber insurance underwriters now require documented access controls, MFA enforcement, device posture checking, and session-level logging. A traditional VPN satisfies almost none of those requirements on its own. SASE unifies ZTNA, threat prevention, and secure web gateway into a single platform, making it far easier to demonstrate the consistent policy enforcement and audit-ready logging that underwriters expect.
Yes. SASE capabilities including ZTNA, secure web gateway, DNS security, and session logging map directly to control requirements across HIPAA, CMMC 2.0, and PCI-DSS v4.0. MSPs who can demonstrate that alignment have a concrete differentiator when competing for clients in healthcare, defense contracting, and financial services.
Remote and hybrid work made consistent remote access a daily operational requirement, exposing VPN performance and security gaps that were previously easy to ignore. Cyber insurers have tightened access control requirements that legacy VPNs cannot satisfy. Compliance frameworks in healthcare, finance, and defense now require documented remote access logging and enforcement that VPN deployments were never built to provide.
Evaluate your security posture against AI-powered attacks and get recommendations to close any gaps.
Subscribe to our newsletter to get our latest insights.