Zero-Trust Security Patents: Who Leads and Where the Filing Is Headed
34.6% concentration at the top. The top 5 assignees combined hold 610 of the 1,763 records in scope — a leader well ahead of the field plus a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants. From 50 records in 2017 to a peak of 392 in 2023, with 2021-2024 showing the strongest sustained growth (+134%). The 2025 and 2026 counts are still filling in as later-filed applications publish.
- 1ZSCALER INC18.7%
- 2FORTINET INC8.5%
- 3NOK NOK LABS INC2.7%
- 4STRONG FORCE TX PORTFOLIO 2018 LLC2.4%
- 5STRONG FORCE VCN PORTFOLIO 2019 LLC2.3%
See the full zero-trust security patent landscape analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions about the zero-trust security patent landscape
Who holds the most zero-trust security patents?
One assignee leads the ranked field with 329 records out of the 1,763 in scope, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 41. The gap between first and fifth place is large enough that the field is better described as one dominant filer plus a long tail of smaller and single-filing entrants, rather than several closely matched leaders. The top 10 assignees combined still only reach 43.1% of all records, so most of the filing activity sits outside the ranked leaders.
Is zero-trust security patent filing still growing?
Yes, based on the last complete filing year in the dataset. Filings rose from 125 in 2021 to 293 in 2024, a 134% increase, with a peak of 392 records in 2023. The 2025 and 2026 counts appear lower only because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so those years are still filling in rather than showing an actual decline.
What patent classes cover zero-trust security inventions?
The two densest classes are H04L (digital information transmission), covering 69.5% of the 1,763 records, and G06F (electric digital data processing), covering 51.5%. Wireless communication networks (H04W, 15.8%) and AI-model-based computing (G06N, 9.0%) are present but far less crowded. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read as coverage rates, not as a breakdown of the total.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Zero-Trust Security Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.