Organizations building out zero trust network access face a real fork in the road when they're already deep in the Microsoft ecosystem: extend zero trust on top of Entra ID, or bring in a purpose-built ZTNA and SSE platform like OpenVPN CloudConnexa. Both paths get you to "never trust, always verify." They get there very differently, and the differences show up the moment you start configuring policy.
CloudConnexa is a cloud-delivered network security platform that unifies ZTNA, secure internet access, SaaS protection, and site-to-site connectivity in one service. Microsoft's answer, delivered through Global Secure Access, is an identity-centric SSE built directly on Entra ID and Conditional Access, sold across Entra Private Access, Entra Internet Access, and the broader Entra Suite. This guide compares both platforms on architecture, administration, zero trust and identity, access use cases, networking, secure internet access, and observability, so you can see where each is strongest and where the trade-offs actually land.
Two platforms, two starting points
The core difference between CloudConnexa and Microsoft Entra isn't a feature checklist — it's what each platform is anchored to. CloudConnexa is built around OpenVPN's Wide-area Private Cloud (WPC) model: an overlay private network spanning CloudConnexa's own Points of Presence, reached through software Connectors that need no inbound firewall ports. Microsoft's Global Secure Access, by contrast, is an identity-centric security service edge (SSE) built on the Entra ID platform, using Conditional Access as its policy engine and delivered from Microsoft's global edge network. One is a network you route through; the other is an identity layer you police traffic against. That distinction resurfaces in almost every section below.
CloudConnexa overview
OpenVPN CloudConnexa is a cloud-delivered network security platform that unifies ZTNA (private application access), secure internet access (content filtering, IDS/IPS), SaaS protection, and site-to-site connectivity into a single service. It's built around the WPC model — an overlay private network spanning CloudConnexa's Points of Presence — through which customers connect their networks via software Connectors that require no inbound ports, and their devices via the OpenVPN Connect client, while OpenVPN operates the control and data planes. CloudConnexa uses OpenVPN Data Channel Offload (DCO) for high performance and applies zero-trust controls based on identity, device, and location context. Client and device connections use the OpenVPN protocol, and IPsec is supported for site-to-site (Network Connector) connections. Its built-in Cyber Shield delivers content filtering and IDS/IPS, and the service is SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 27001 certified.
Microsoft Entra (Global Secure Access) overview
Microsoft's Entra access suite is a cloud-delivered SSE/ZTNA offering called Global Secure Access, comprising Entra Private Access (ZTNA for private applications) and Entra Internet Access (a secure web gateway for internet and SaaS traffic), together with a Microsoft 365 traffic profile. It's delivered from Microsoft's global network — 70 regions and 190+ edge locations, Anycast-routed — and built on the Entra ID identity platform, with Conditional Access as its policy engine. Devices connect through the Global Secure Access client (Windows, macOS, iOS, Android; there is no Linux client); branches connect through IPsec remote-network tunnels; and Private Access private apps are reached through outbound-only connectors hosted on Windows Server. Entra Internet Access adds web content filtering, TLS inspection, threat-intelligence filtering, and universal tenant restrictions, while deeper CASB and DLP are delivered by the separate Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps and Microsoft Purview products. Access, MFA, device compliance, and risk are governed centrally through Conditional Access and Continuous Access Evaluation. The most complete feature set ships in the Entra Suite bundle; Private Access, Internet Access, risk-based controls (Entra ID P2), CASB, and advanced DLP all carry their own licensing.
When to Choose CloudConnexa vs. Microsoft Entra
- You want a single service that bundles ZTNA, secure internet access (content filtering and IDS/IPS), and site-to-site connectivity over the OpenVPN or IPsec protocols.
- You need broad client and router compatibility, including a Linux client and OpenVPN-compatible routers.
- You need multiple isolated overlay networks in one account, and you'd rather have IDS/IPS and content filtering included than licensed as separate add-ons.
Choose Microsoft Entra if:
- Your organization is already standardized on Entra ID and Microsoft 365, and you want Conditional Access as a single identity-centric policy engine across private apps, internet, and SaaS.
- You're prepared to license Private Access, Internet Access, and — for full CASB and DLP — the separate Defender for Cloud Apps and Purview products.
- You can work within the current client constraints: no Linux client, an IPv4-only client tunnel, secure DNS (DoH/DoT) that must be disabled for FQDN-based private access, and a hard requirement that Private Access traffic goes through the client.
Architectural trade-offs
The two differ in what they are anchored to: CloudConnexa is an OpenVPN/IPsec network overlay routed through vendor-operated regional gateways, while Global Secure Access is an identity-centric SSE built on Entra ID, using Conditional Access as its policy engine and a proprietary client transport. The points below weigh that difference and test where common claims hold.
Where the Entra architecture can help
- Access decisions reuse the same Conditional Access, MFA, risk, and device-compliance signals that already govern Microsoft 365, so policy stays consistent for Entra-centric organizations.
- Traffic is delivered from a large global network — 70 regions, 190+ edge locations — with Anycast routing.
- The Microsoft 365 traffic profile optimizes and secures M365 traffic and adds universal tenant restrictions to limit data movement to unauthorized tenants.
- Continuous Access Evaluation can revoke access in near real time when risk or policy changes.
- The client uses a lightweight filter driver rather than a VPN adapter, so it can coexist with other VPN/SSE clients.
Trade-offs and claim vs. reality
- It's single-tenant: there's no concept of multiple isolated overlay networks within one account, so OT/IoT/IT isolation is done with connector groups and Conditional Access inside one tenant, or by using separate tenants. (CloudConnexa supports multiple WPCs natively.)
- "Zero trust for any app" carries client caveats — Private Access requires the Global Secure Access client, can't run over the IPsec remote-network path, has no Linux client, tunnels IPv4 only, and doesn't support QUIC for Internet Access.
- A stable public egress IP for SaaS IP allow-listing isn't a turnkey Microsoft-assigned IP; it requires hosting a connector (source IP anchoring) so the SaaS app sees your controlled egress. Source IP restoration is a different feature that only enriches sign-in logs.
- Full CASB and advanced DLP are separate products (Defender for Cloud Apps, Microsoft Purview) with their own licensing, not part of Global Secure Access itself. (Cyber Shield's content filtering and IDS/IPS ship natively in CloudConnexa.)
- The client-to-edge transport is proprietary and not publicly specified (neither WireGuard nor OpenVPN), and secure DNS (DoH/DoT) must be disabled for FQDN-based private access — an operational constraint worth planning around.
Feature comparison
| Architecture & Deployment Model |
|---|
| Capability |
| Cloud-hosted control + data plane |
| Multiple isolated overlay networks |
| Edge / regions |
| Device connection |
| Network / site connectivity |
| Agentless / clientless options |
| Multi-cloud reach |
| Administration & Management |
|---|
| Capability |
| Web admin console |
| Public API |
| Infrastructure-as-code |
| Provisioning |
| Policy engine / RBAC |
| Zero Trust & Identity |
|---|
| Capability |
| Access model |
| User authentication |
| Simultaneous IdP + local auth |
| Multiple group membership per user |
| MFA |
| Device posture / compliance |
| Location / geo context |
| SCIM provisioning |
| Service / non-human identity |
| Device / supply-chain trust |
| Access Use Cases |
|---|
| Capability |
| Remote access |
| Site-to-site |
| Internet gateway / secure egress |
| Application-level ZTNA |
| SaaS access security (tenant restrictions) |
| SaaS login-IP allow-listing (static egress IP) |
| Clientless end-user access |
| Split tunneling |
| Networking |
|---|
| Capability |
| Client/device protocol |
| WireGuard |
| Site / connector protocols |
| DNS |
| IPv6 |
| QUIC handling |
| Overlapping-IP / domain routing |
| Secure Internet Access |
|---|
| Capability |
| Secure web gateway (SWG) |
| Content / URL / category filtering |
| TLS / SSL inspection |
| IDS / IPS |
| Malware / threat protection |
| DLP |
| CASB / SaaS security |
| Cloud firewall (FWaaS) |
| Observability & Operations |
|---|
| Capability |
| Audit / activity logging |
| Access / traffic visibility |
| SIEM / log export |
| Enriched logs |
| Alerts / dashboards |
Which platform fits your organization?
If you want one platform that bundles ZTNA, secure internet access, and site-to-site connectivity, with broad client support and multiple isolated networks in a single account, CloudConnexa is built for that out of the box. If you're already standardized on Entra ID and Microsoft 365 and want a single identity-centric policy engine across private apps, internet, and SaaS — and you're comfortable licensing CASB and DLP separately — Microsoft Entra's Global Secure Access is the more native fit. Many organizations end up running both: Entra ID as the identity source of truth, CloudConnexa as the ZTNA and secure-internet-access layer on top of it.
Want to see CloudConnexa on your own network? Get started free or book a demo.
Related reading
https://blog.openvpn.net/comparing-openvpn-cloudconnexa-and-microsoft-entra
Source: r/CloudConnexa · by /u/OpenVPNinc