Cyber-attacks aren’t a dramatic, once‑in‑a‑lifetime set of events, these days they are part of routine operations and they hit organisations of every size. In 2025 we saw this play out clearly when Jaguar Land Rover, Co‑Op and Marks & Spencer (M&S) all found themselves dealing with serious incidents. It was a blunt reminder that no brand is too established or too well resourced to avoid being caught out.

When something like this happens, the technical response is only half the story. The other half, and often the part that decides whether customers stay calm or start losing trust, is how the company communicates. Clear and honest updates can stop a difficult situation from turning into a reputational mess.

That’s what crisis communications is about: being upfront, cutting through confusion and helping people understand what’s going on without adding to the panic.

In 2025, M&S showed what it looks like when a company takes that responsibility seriously. In this article we review what M&S did well, lessons other organisations can learn from M&S’s response to their cyber-attack, and provide practical, actionable steps for businesses who want to make sure they have the right incident response and communication plans in place should they be attacked.

A Quick Introduction to Crisis Communications

So let’s get started. First of all, what is Crisis Communications and why are they so important in an incident response process?

Crisis communications are the structured approach organisations use to communicate during unexpected, high‑pressure events, anything from a data breach to a product recall to a global pandemic. The goal is simple: protect people, protect trust, and protect the business.

Why does it matter so much today?

  • Cyber-attacks are increasing in scale and impact. 2025 was more evidence of the notoriety of cyber risk increasing, with attacks deeply affecting economic stability and business continuity.
  • Customers expect transparency. Silence or vague statements erode trust faster than the breach itself.
  • Regulators are watching. Poor communication can lead to reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny.
  • Social media accelerates everything. Misinformation spreads instantly if organisations don’t fill the information vacuum.

Done well, crisis communications can turn a chaotic situation into a moment of leadership. Done poorly, it can turn a technical incident into a reputational disaster.

What Happened: The 2025 Marks & Spencer Cyber Attack

In April 2025, Marks & Spencer disclosed a major cyber-attack that severely disrupted its operations. The incident was identified as a ransomware breach which forced the retailer to shut down automated ordering and stock systems, leading to empty shelves and significant operational strain.

The impact was substantial:

  • Online sales were brought to a standstill
  • Food shelves were left bare
  • The financial hit was enormous
  • Disruption lasted for months

Despite the severity of the incident, M&S managed to maintain customer trust and protect its brand reputation. And that wasn’t luck, it was through communication.

How M&S Communicated During the Crisis

While the technical details of the attack were complex, M&S’s communication strategy was refreshingly simple: be honest, be visible, and be human.

They Communicated Early and Openly

M&S didn’t wait for rumours to spread or for customers to notice empty shelves. They disclosed the attack promptly, explaining the nature of the disruption and its expected duration.

This early transparency helped:

  • Set expectations
  • Reduce speculation
  • Demonstrate accountability
  • Build trust during uncertainty

In a world where many organisations still try to “keep things quiet,” M&S chose clarity over concealment.

They Provided Regular, Timely Updates

Throughout the incident, M&S issued ongoing updates to investors, customers, and the media. Timely updates prevented:

  • Confusion
  • Misinformation
  • Customer frustration

And importantly, they showed that M&S was in control, even if at times the situation itself wasn’t.

They Used Clear, Accessible Language

M&S avoided technical jargon and focused on what customers needed to know:

  • What happened
  • How it affected them
  • What the company was doing about it
  • When things would return to normal

This is especially important in cyber incidents, where overly technical explanations can alienate or confuse audiences.

They Demonstrated Leadership Visibility

M&S’s CEO played a prominent role in communications, offering reassurance and outlining recovery plans. His public statements emphasised both transparency and determination, including the company’s intention to use the disruption as an opportunity to accelerate technology transformation

Leadership visibility signals:

  • Accountability
  • Confidence
  • Stability

And it reassures customers that the organisation is taking the incident seriously.

They Maintained a Customer‑Centric Tone

Even while dealing with operational chaos, M&S kept the focus on customer experience. Their messaging acknowledged the inconvenience, explained the impact on stock and online services, and reassured customers that restoring normal service was the top priority.

This empathetic tone helped mitigate the psychological impact of the attack, particularly the anxiety customers feel when their favourite retailer experiences a breach.

Lessons Other Businesses Can Learn from M&S

The M&S incident offers valuable lessons for organisations of all sizes, not just retail giants.

Here are the key takeaways.

Transparency Builds Trust -Customers don’t expect perfection, but they do expect honesty. Being upfront about what happened and what you’re doing to fix it is always better than silence.

  • Speed Matters –The first 24–48 hours of a cyber incident are critical. Quick communication prevents rumours and demonstrates control.
  • Consistency Is Key – Regular updates – even if the update is “we’re still working on it” keep stakeholders reassured.
  • Leadership Should Be Visible – A calm, confident leader can steady the ship and reinforce trust.
  • Empathy Goes a Long Way – Cyber-attacks are stressful for customers too. Acknowledging their concerns helps maintain loyalty.
  • Preparation Makes Everything Easier – M&S’s ability to communicate effectively didn’t happen by accident. It happened because they had plans, processes, and trained people.

Cyber‑Focused Advice for Businesses Preparing for Attacks

If the Marks & Spencer incident taught us anything, it’s that crisis communications doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It’s tightly woven into cyber readiness, technical resilience, and the ability to make decisions quickly under pressure. Here’s how organisations can strengthen their cyber posture and their communication capability at the same time.

Build a Real‑World Incident Response Plan

Not a theoretical document. Not a dusty PDF. A plan people can actually use at 2am when the ransomware alarm goes off.

It should include:

  • Clear roles and responsibilities
  • Playbooks for the most likely attack types
  • A rapid approval process for communications
  • A single source of truth for updates

A good plan removes panic and replaces it with muscle memory.

Know Your Crown Jewels

You can’t protect everything equally. Identify:

  • Your most critical systems
  • Your most sensitive data
  • Your highest‑risk suppliers

This helps you prioritise both your technical response and your communications when something goes wrong.

Train Your People (Not Just IT)

Cyber incidents are cross‑functional events. Everyone needs to know:

  • How to report suspicious activity
  • What to say, and what not to say
  • How to route media or customer enquiries
  • How to avoid spreading unverified information

For example, Tabletop exercises are a great way to expose gaps and build confidence. At Cyberfort we recommend Incident Response plans are tested on annual basis as a minimum. The crisis simulation exercises undertaken should provide common attack scenarios tailored to your organisations specific sector so you can see where the communication, process and response gaps are in real time before an incident happens.

Prepare Customer‑Friendly Messaging in Advance

When an incident hits, you won’t have time to wordsmith. Pre‑prepare:

  • Holding statements
  • FAQs
  • Internal updates
  • Regulator‑ready notifications

Keep them simple, human, and jargon‑free.

Establish a Crisis Communications “Battle Rhythm”

Decide in advance:

  • How often you’ll issue updates
  • Who approves messaging
  • Which channels you’ll use
  • How you’ll coordinate with technical teams

This rhythm keeps everyone aligned and prevents misinformation from filling the silence.

Strengthen Your Technical Foundations

Good crisis communications are easier when your cyber basics are solid. Prioritise:

  • Access Controls
  • Regular patching
  • Network segmentation
  • Tested offline backups
  • Endpoint detection and response
  • Supplier risk assessments
  • Regular security reviews by a specialist MSSP

These controls reduce the blast radius, and the communication chaos.

Build a Culture of Early Reporting

The sooner you know something’s wrong; the sooner you can contain it. Encourage:

  • Zero‑blame reporting
  • Quick escalation
  • Transparency across teams

Culture is one of the most underrated cyber controls.

Glen Williams, CEO of Cyberfort Group discusses why UK boards must lead with resilience, beyond compliance, to prevent costly breaches.


Infrastructure-level attacks

Despite growing investment in cybersecurity, many UK businesses remain critically exposed to infrastructure-level attacks.

They are under siege; from state actors, criminal groups and opportunistic attackers exploiting any weakness.

Too many are operating under a concerning illusion of safety, believing being compliant means being secure.

But compliance is not resilience and ticking regulatory boxes is no defence strategy.

The biggest vulnerability is not always a firewall or an unpatched system.

Increasingly, it lies at the top. This is the boardroom blind spot – a disconnect between the perceived and actual state of cybersecurity in UK organisations.

Many underestimate the scale, sophistication and speed of cyber-threats.

The result? A slow drift toward crisis – costing money, reputations, operations and in some cases, the very survival of the business.

Leaders must ask the hard questions: If we were breached tomorrow, could we still operate? How fast could we recover – and at what cost?

From airports to automakers: The threat is escalating

Recent attacks on Jaguar Land Rover, major UK airport ransomware incidents and other critical infrastructure show no sector is immune.

Attackers are more organised, more aggressive and increasingly focused on large-scale disruption.

These breaches often succeed not because defences are absent, but because they are insufficient.  

Many businesses still assume cybersecurity is ‘being handled’ by internal IT or third-party providers – often generalists, not specialists.

But when facing organised crime groups or state-sponsored actors, general IT skills fall short.

The analogy holds: No one would trust a nurse to perform brain surgery – so why expect an IT generalist to protect the core of a business against elite cyber-threats?

The numbers speak for themselves. Of the 2.7 million registered UK businesses, only around 51,000 meet Cyber Essentials standards.

So basic cyber-hygiene is still being overlooked. With critical infrastructure now a prime target, the stakes are rising fast. Cybersecurity must be led from the top, by boards.

Why compliance does not equal resilience

Regulatory compliance frameworks such as ISO 27001, GDPR, the upcoming UK Cyber Resilience Act and Cyber Essentials serve a valuable purpose.

They set minimum standards and enforce accountability, but structure alone is not protection.

Compliance does not mean a business can detect, respond to or recover from an attack.

In fact, many companies seriously breached in recent years were fully compliant – on paper – but not operationally ready.

It is entirely possible to pass an audit and still be breached the very next day.

Worse, compliance is often used as a proxy for resilience – but it is often a lagging indicator of risk.

True resilience means having expert-led, scenario-tested, continuously evaluated strategies that are regularly refined and adapted to new threats.

Anything less leaves businesses dangerously exposed.

What real cyber-resilience looks like

Cyber-resilience is not a product you buy nor a policy you publish.

It is the organisation’s ability to absorb shocks and continue operating with minimal disruption – even when under attack.

Resilience starts at the board-level. This includes recognising cybersecurity as a core business risk as well as bringing in trusted partners, such as NCSC-assured consultancies who can help prepare organisations before, during and after an attack.

Resilient businesses invest in more than software; they invest in strategy.

They rehearse their response so that when a breach inevitably happens, teams avoid losing time or capability. 

Access to experts like virtual Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) or specialist placements support stronger governance.

Resilience also means going beyond annual assessments to include regular threat modelling, red teaming and incident response drills.

Preparedness must extend across the entire organisation: Leadership, technical teams and non-technical staff alike.

At Cyberfort, resilience is defined not by how quickly companies recover, but by how little it loses in the process – whether that is trust, uptime, data integrity, capital or brand reputation.

Accountability cannot be outsourced

Cyber-risk is business risk – it impacts revenue, reputation, regulatory standing and long-term viability.

Yet this reality is recurringly not landing where it needs to: In the boardroom.

Too often, cybersecurity is viewed as technical – something IT should manage.

This mindset leads to underinvestment, poor response protocols and strategic blind spots in decision-making when it matters most.

Boards are responsible for resilience. Delegating without oversight or mistaking compliance for readiness, is a dereliction of that duty.

Leaders must ask the right questions, challenge assumptions and ensure cybersecurity is embedded in strategic planning.

When cyber is ignored at the top, the entire organisation is left vulnerable.

To close the boardroom blind spot, leaders must first make cybersecurity a standing board agenda item – not as an operational update, but a strategic risk discussion and treated with the same urgency as financial performance or operational risks.

Cybersecurity breaches can impact the balance sheet just as swiftly and severely as a major market event.

Second, boards must invest in education for directors.

While directors do not need to be technical experts, they must understand the business implications associated with cyber-threats.

Finally, success metrics must shift. Instead of measuring success by the absence of incidents, organisations should focus on the speed and effectiveness of detection, containment and recovery efforts.

Don’t wait for the crisis

The time of treating cybersecurity as an IT issue has long passed.

Cyber-risk now permeates every strategic decision – from M&A to supply chains.

The price of inaction is not theoretical – it is real and growing – just ask the companies that did not survive.

The fallout of recent breaches includes broken shareholder value, customer trust and long-term reputational damage that no insurance policy can undo.

Far too many businesses rely on generalist defences in a specialist threat environment.

Boards can no longer afford to sit on the side-lines.

Cybersecurity must be embedded into every strategic decision, not siloed as a compliance exercise.

The question is no longer if a breach will occur, but how well the organisation will be prepared to respond when it does.

Those who wait for the crisis to act will already be too late.

In this video Cyberfort CEO Glen Williams and Chair of Bluprintx Mark Humphries discuss why UK organisations need specialist cyber security support given the 50%+ rise in cyber security incidents in the past 12 months.

The video covers a range of topics which Cyber Security and C-Suite leaders need to be aware of to ensure their businesses remain secure, resilient and compliant in an ever-changing digital world. Watch the video to discover:

  • Three key pieces of advice for C-Level leaders when they are looking to improve their organisations cyber resilience
  • Why there has been a significant increase in attacks aimed at UK businesses in the past 12 months and the role AI is playing in this
  • The importance of undertaking a regular cyber security review from an NCSC assured provider to ensure organisations can benchmark and create continuous improvement plans for cyber security
  • Why Crisis Simulation Exercises are crucial for C-Suite leaders in making sure the right people, processes and policies are tested and in place before an attack happens
  • Why more due diligence and investment needs to be made in supply chain cyber security measures to protect an organisation from attack
  • The importance of partnering with an expert MSSP if your business does not have the right skills, knowledge or expertise in house to remain secure

With daily news dominated by escalating cyber‑risk, geopolitically charged data flows and deep regulatory scrutiny, the old mantra of “cost per rack” when evaluating colocation simply doesn’t cut it anymore.

For organisations delivering mission‑critical infrastructure, choosing a truly ultra‑secure, UK‑sovereign colocation platform demands a broader view: one that factors in not just operating costs, but the cost of data trust, and the costs when things go wrong.

The Typical Cost Conversation and its limitation

On the surface, colocation decisions often boil down to monthly fees: rack space, power draw, bandwidth, remote hands, and connectivity. But focusing purely on “rack cost + power cost” misses three critical elements:

Data Trust & Sovereignty – where is your data, who can access it, under which jurisdiction, and how does that affect client confidence and regulatory compliance?

Security and Resilience Premiums – the incremental cost of higher assurance, isolation, certification, defence‑in‑depth etc.

Failure Costs – what happens if a breach, ransomware event or infrastructure outage occurs? The hidden costs here often dwarf the monthly fees.

Why UK Sovereignty Matters

When your colocation solution isn’t just “UK hosted” but truly UK sovereign i.e. infrastructure, operations, control, support remaining within UK jurisdiction – the number of risk vectors reduces dramatically. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) emphasises the importance of clear governance and data localisation, whilst global hyperscale cloud providers admit they can’t guarantee all data processing remains within the UK.

For organisations with mission-critical or complex data hosting, this means you can offer clients:

  • Clear control over data jurisdiction and access
  • Reduced third‑party/global dependency risk
  • Improved regulatory/compliance alignment – especially for regulated industries (finance, healthcare, defence)
  • Higher client confidence (and therefore premium positioning)

Expanding the TCO Model:  The Value of Trust and Cost of Failure

The Value of Trust. Your ability to guarantee data is held within UK jurisdiction, under UK law, with UK‑cleared support staff, adds value. That trust translates into:

  • Easier client acquisition (especially in regulated sectors)
  • Lower risk premium and insurance cost for clients
  • Strengthened differentiation and higher pricing potential for your services

Underestimating this means you may sell yourself short: a cheaper “generic colocation” may appear less costly but could cost you in lost deals or higher future remediation burden.

The Cost of Failure. Let’s model the kind of costs that hit organisations when things go bad:

  • Breach / ransomware event: Loss of productivity, incident response, forensic investigation, legal/regulatory fines, customer notification/credit‑monitoring, reputational damage. The UK data‑centre industry estimates outages alone cost the industry “low single‑digit billions £/year”, with knock‑on costs to customers of some £0.7 billion in 2019 data alone.
  • Data sovereignty breach: If data migrates or is accessed outside the UK (or appears to be), you may face fines under UK GDPR / Data Protection Act 2018, or lose client trust entirely.
  • Infrastructure failure: If your colocation doesn’t deliver promised resilience (dual power feeds, N+1 cooling, accredited security) you may trigger client SLAs, business interruption losses, SLA credits or client churn.

When choosing colocation with ultra‑secure UK sovereign credentials you’re effectively buying insurance – higher cost now, lower risk later.

Jim Manuel – Cloud Solutions Consultant – Cyberfort


“In a world where data crosses borders in milliseconds – sovereignty brings control back home.”

For years, organisations have embraced global cloud platforms for their speed, flexibility, and reach. Yet as the world becomes more unpredictable, that global reach has also brought new risk – from shifting regulations to uncertainty about who ultimately controls and accesses critical data. The cloud conversation is changing. Trust and control have become the new foundations of digital confidence.

Across the UK and Europe, the focus is moving from global to local. Gartner recently described this shift as “geopatriation” – the growing move to repatriate workloads from global hyperscalers back to trusted, sovereign, or regional providers. According to the latest research, 61% of Western European IT leaders plan to increase their reliance on local cloud providers in response to geopolitical pressures. By 2030, more than three-quarters of enterprises outside the US are expected to have adopted a formal digital sovereignty strategy.

In this context, the UK Sovereign Cloud is more than an alternative hosting option – it represents a return to confidence, compliance, and control.

The Shift in the Cloud Conversation

The global cloud was built for scale, but scale alone no longer guarantees assurance. Rising compliance demands, increased scrutiny of cross-border data transfers, and the heightened importance of national resilience have pushed sovereignty to the top of boardroom agendas.

For many UK organisations, this evolution is not about rejecting global innovation but about regaining transparency and governance. Data is a strategic asset, and ensuring that it is stored, managed, and protected under UK jurisdiction is now seen as essential to long-term business stability and customer trust.

The UK Sovereign Cloud model blends the agility of modern cloud computing with the assurance of UK-based operation, providing the best of both worlds – performance and protection, scalability and sovereignty.

Why Sovereignty Now Matters

The growing emphasis on sovereignty is being driven by several converging forces.
First, regulation: the UK GDPR and other compliance frameworks continue to demand clarity over where data resides and who has access to it. Second, geopolitics: global tensions have re-ignited questions about data dependency and foreign jurisdiction. Third, customer trust: as cyber threats increase, clients are demanding greater visibility and accountability from their providers.

Sovereignty is not isolation – it’s assurance. When workloads are hosted in sovereign cloud environments, data remains subject to UK law, with transparent access controls, audited processes, and clear accountability. For regulated sectors such as finance, healthcare, defence, and the public sector, this is no longer optional. It’s foundational.

The Trust Factor – Control, Compliance, Confidence

Trust is no longer assumed – it is engineered.

A UK Sovereign Cloud creates trust through three simple principles:

Control – Data hosted, processed, and supported entirely within UK borders by UK-cleared personnel.

Compliance – Alignment with UK GDPR, ISO, and NCSC standards, removing uncertainty in governance and audits.

Confidence – Assurance that your infrastructure is physically, legally, and operationally protected within the UK’s own jurisdiction.

At Cyberfort, these values are built into every solution we deliver – from private cloud and colocation to managed security and business continuity. Our ultra-secure, Tier-3 aligned facilities and cloud platforms are designed to give organisations absolute confidence in their digital environment.

Because in the end, sovereignty is not just about where your data sits – it’s about who stands behind it.

Building Sovereignty into the Cloud

True sovereignty is not a label – it’s a framework.

That framework combines UK-based data centres, UK-operated connectivity, UK governance, and UK expertise. It’s a cloud ecosystem engineered to ensure that compliance, resilience, and innovation can coexist.

Cyberfort’s approach to sovereign cloud is rooted in this philosophy. Every solution we architect is designed around the principles of protection, performance, and partnership. From backup and recovery to dedicated private cloud environments, we enable organisations to modernise with confidence, knowing their operations are both secure and sovereign.

In a world where “geopatriation” is beginning to redefine cloud strategies, this approach gives UK businesses a platform for growth – one built on transparency, trust, and control.

Introduction

Secure by Design (SbD) was launched in July 2023 and its already transforming the way government departments and the MOD are implementing security. Perhaps one of the biggest changes to UK Cyber Security processes in the last 15 years, Secure by Design aims to ensure all of your systems, processes and data are secure from concept to its launch and then throughout its full lifecycle.

Before we delve deeper into the blog, it’s important to note that MOD Secure by Design and Governmental Secure by design are different. Despite having the same name, the same premise and the same objectives, their execution, delivery and assurance processes are different. They have different principles, different timelines and different maturity levels, with at present MOD Secure by Design being almost fully introduced into MOD programmes and projects. UK Government Secure by design is following suit and is ready to secure projects and systems with its 10 principles.  This article will be looking at the first and most transformative principle, Principle 1: Create responsibility for Cyber Risk.

For the first time, strategic leaders and leadership throughout projects/programmes will be empowered to be responsible and accountable for Cyber Security risk.  Some of these positions will have never encountered Cyber Security before. But by spreading the risk ownership and the understanding across the business/program/project, these projects/programmes will be able to deliver far more secure products and processes, with a far greater security lifespan.

Addressing the elephant in the room – businesses have never been the biggest lovers of major change. To understand these large scale governmental Secure by Design changes it’s important to know why these changes are being implemented, and to understand the benefits of Secure by Design.

Unlocking the Benefits of Secure by Design Principle 1Create responsibility for Cyber Risk

A key benefit of Secure by Design is how it affects leadership. Leaders at every level are decision makers and greater understanding of Cyber Security and its risks will ensure that leaders make better decisions.  By implementing Secure by Design principles leaders are able to make informed decisions, and better decisions will be made when leaders understand cyber risks. This empowerment towards leadership is not just at the executive level, it cascades down, resulting in leaders at all levels having an understanding of cyber risk and ensuring it is understood and mitigated. This creates a much more comprehensive risk understanding and security controls that are better informed, and therefore far more fitting.

Too often there is a disconnect between executive leadership and the technical teams responsible for securing systems. This gap can result in poorly informed decision-making, lack of investment, and incorrect prioritisation of risk mitigation. By clearly assigning cyber security responsibilities to stakeholders, such as CEOs, COO’s as well as Chief Risk Officers and Board Members, organisations ensure that cyber risk is treated alongside financial, legal, and operational risks.

Another major benefit of Secure by Design is that it aims to stop Cyber Security work being siloed, or existing in isolation. Cyber Security attackers will normally attack a wide surface, not just the security function, and so security needs to be in the forefront of everyone’s minds. By empowering security to staff throughout the business, rather than just the security team it not only spreads awareness but deepens the security scrutiny and allows security to be looked at from subject matter experts, potentially highlighting weaknesses that a cyber security team member would not be able to see.

A case study of where specific expertise has been siloed can be seen within NASA in the 1970’s, specifically during the challenger builds. Engineering teams identified that the ‘O rings’, a component of the lower rockets could fail, which could in turn lead to the entire failure of the launch. This severe risk was not fully understood by senior stakeholders’, and their findings were siloed within the rocket engineering team, unable to get their extreme risk findings correctly communicated or mitigated. This tragically led to the destruction of Challenger on launch and the loss of her entire crew.

By having all teams empowered to not just understand security risks but have influence over them gives the opportunity for projects and programmes to be more secure. Most organisations already do this for safety, and so security will now be no different.

The key challenges organisations must overcome

Of course, as with any organisational change there are challenges. The largest challenge so far observed in the Secure by Design rollout is leaders who are newly empowered to be responsible or accountable for cyber security being unwilling or unable to fully immerse themselves into the new role.

Many leaders face busy days, heavy workloads and hold a lot of responsibility already. With the changes being made some are being informed that they must take on more responsibility in an area they may be unfamiliar with. They may not welcome the changes and therefore will not commit to them as intended. A potential sign of this may be them trying to delegate this responsibility to another team member or someone within their team, pushing work deadlines back indefinitely or openly stating that they are going to refuse to partake. This unfortunately will mean that the delegation of security accountability at all levels will not be being implemented correctly, and that person is not only creating risk but a risk themselves.

The best way to remedy this so far has been to educate these leaders in the importance of the security work and the new responsibility they hold, and to ensure that their workload is balanced well enough that they can correctly adapt to the changes.

The rise of AI tools has been the fastest technology adoption curve in history. In under two years, millions of small businesses have started using tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Midjourney to write marketing copy, summarise reports, or answer customer questions.

But as AI gets smarter, the risks become sharper and so does the need for governance.

The Double-Edged Sword of AI in SMB’s

AI can turbocharge productivity. It drafts documents, analyses trends, and automates repetitive admin at a fraction of the cost of human time. But behind the promise lies a fundamental truth: AI is only as safe as the data and instructions you feed it.

When staff paste client information, financial details, or internal plans into public AI tools, that data can be stored, processed, and used to train external models. It leaves your organisation permanently exposed, even if the upload was “just a quick test.”

Real-World Warnings

  • Samsung engineers accidentally leaked confidential source code by asking ChatGPT for help debugging it.
  • AI-generated phishing and voice cloning are now indistinguishable from the real thing -cybercriminals use these tools to impersonate CEOs and authorise fraudulent payments.
  • Marketing teams have faced copyright and privacy disputes after publishing AI-generated content built on protected data.
  • One SME experimenting with agentic AI bots – autonomous systems that act via APIs – accidentally flooded its internal Slack with thousands of automated messages, paralysing workflow for a day.

These aren’t hypothetical. They’re the early warning signs of a new risk class: AI misconfiguration and misuse.

Governance Is the New Firewall

AI governance doesn’t mean bureaucracy; it means boundaries. Businesses need to start taking this seriously and start by mapping where AI touches their business. For example, key questions which should be asked to assess where and how AI is being used in a business include:

  • What tools are employees using?
  • What data do they process?
  • Where do outputs go (to clients, websites, systems)?

Then, once you have answered the questions, a one-page AI Usage Policy should be created covering:


Approved tools and when to use them.

Data rules – never input confidential or identifiable information into public models.

Oversight – who reviews outputs before publication.

Accountability – who owns AI risk in your organisation.

Once you know where AI sits in your workflow, your MSP can help enforce controls like data loss prevention, sandboxing, and access logging.

The “Human in the Loop” Principle

AI is powerful but not autonomous. Even so-called “agentic” systems need human supervision.
Every AI-driven process should have a human checkpoint before any irreversible action happens (emails sent, payments triggered, data deleted).

Think of AI as an intern – fast, tireless, but prone to confidently getting things wrong.

Security Opportunities

There’s good news too: AI can strengthen your defences when used wisely. Modern detection tools use machine learning to identify anomalies faster than human analysts ever could. AI can summarise logs, flag risky behaviour, and help non-technical teams spot patterns they’d otherwise miss.
The difference between risk and reward is control.

Policy, People, and Partnership

The SMB advantage is agility, you can adapt faster than enterprises. Use that agility to get ahead with a few simple practices:

  • Assign an AI Lead to track developments, risks, and opportunities.
  • Include AI in your risk register and data governance policies.
  • Educate your teams: if they don’t understand how AI handles data, they can’t use it safely.
  • Work with your MSP to implement guardrails, such as API monitoring, MFA, and content-filtering on AI platforms.

In this video Glen Williams (Cyberfort CEO) and Emily Rees (Cyberfort CFO) discuss why directors of UK companies should be focused on addressing the cyber security risks their businesses are facing. The video covers a range of topics including the importance of undertaking a cyber security audit by a specialist cyber security company to assess your company’s security posture, why supply chain cyber security measures should be focused on given the recent attacks on UK businesses and how to embed cyber security into your companies risk register for improved cyber resilience.

Cyber security has evolved into a board-level issue, a defining factor in business resilience, continuity, and reputation. Yet too often, it remains an IT sub-category rather than a strategic risk discipline. Many organisations still rely solely on their Managed Service Provider (MSP) to handle security, but the truth is, MSPs weren’t built for today’s threat landscape.

To protect your organisation effectively, you need a specialist Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP) working in tandem with your MSP. One that brings the depth, visibility, and threat expertise your IT partner can’t reasonably maintain alone.

The Modern Reality: MSPs Keep You Running – MSSPs Keep You Safe

In most small and mid-sized organisations, the same team responsible for patching servers and resetting passwords is also expected to manage firewalls, monitor alerts, and handle incident response. They’re dedicated professionals, but they’re not security analysts.

That’s where gaps emerge. Activity gets mistaken for assurance: antivirus is installed, firewalls are ticked off, backups exist somewhere, yet crucial elements like threat intelligence, 24/7 monitoring, and incident containment are missing.

An MSP’s mission is uptime, availability, and efficiency. An MSSP’s mission is resilience, detection, and response. You need both to operate safely.

The Cost of Relying on “IT Security”

Recent high-profile breaches tell the same story, again and again.

When responsibility for cyber risk is dispersed or delegated to people without specialist training blind spots multiply silently.

  • Third-party risks go unchecked
  • Incident responses are improvised
  • Data governance is inconsistent

Traditional MSPs are invaluable for keeping systems working; but without an MSSP watching the threat landscape, vulnerabilities fester unseen until they become headlines.

Cyber Is a Business Risk – Not a Technical One

Modern resilience isn’t about who patches the server; it’s about who owns the risk. Cyber events today carry legal, financial, and reputational consequences. They demand not just technology, but governance, reporting, and continuous assurance.

MSSPs specialise in that domain. They complement MSPs by providing:

• Proactive threat monitoring and response
• Advanced detection capabilities (EDR/XDR/SIEM)
• Compliance support aligned to frameworks like ISO 27001 and NIS2
• Executive-level risk reporting that boards can actually act on

In short: your MSP keeps the lights on; your MSSP makes sure no one’s breaking in while they’re on.

Evolving the Partnership: MSP + MSSP = Resilience

The relationship between your MSP, MSSP, and internal leadership should form a three-way partnership.

  • The MSP manages infrastructure, availability, and productivity
  • The MSSP manages threat posture, monitoring, and incident readiness
  • The business owns governance and decision-making

This collaboration creates shared visibility and clear accountability. It prevents the common scenario where everyone assumes “someone else” is watching for threats, until it’s too late.

Building Competence Without Building a Department

You don’t need an in-house security team to operate securely. You need the right structure:

  • An internal Cyber Owner who bridges leadership and suppliers
  • A trusted MSP maintaining day-to-day IT operations
  • A specialist MSSP delivering dedicated detection, response, and governance

This model lets organisations achieve enterprise-grade protection without enterprise-level overheads.

Culture Over Checklists

Technology is only half the story. Resilient organisations invest in cyber culture – awareness, curiosity, and accountability across every level. An MSSP can help embed this mindset, turning security from a compliance burden into a competitive advantage.

Secure by Design sets a framework of Principles for the delivery of digital capability with cyber security and risk management at the core. This blog article explores how continual assurance measures: Vulnerability Management and Security Controls Testing ensure that delivery Principles including Principle 5: Build in Detect and Respond Security and Principle 7: Minimise the Attack Surface continue to be effective through-life by implementing Principle 9: Embed Continuous Assurance.

Vulnerability Management is a critical component of ongoing security assurance, providing risk owners with continuous evidence that the system’s security controls and capabilities are functioning as intended. This assurance spans the full lifecycle of a system from development to deployment and into ongoing operation.

Security Controls Testing verifies that security controls and capabilities continue to function as intended, especially after deployment and during system operation. Combined, they support the application of Secure by Design, building a resilient security posture.

Key Benefits of Vulnerability Management and Controls Testing

Secure by Design principles embedded into the development process, ensures that activities and controls such as threat modelling, secure coding, continuous testing, access controls, encryption and monitoring have validation mechanisms in place. In the next section of this article, we explore what the key principles are for vulnerability management and controls testing, highlighting the key benefits organisations can realise by adopting a Secure by Design approach.

Risk Mitigation and Management
Principle 5; emphasises proactively embedding detection and response mechanisms into systems and services during design and development, and not as an afterthought. This foundation allows vulnerability management to be more proactive, focusing on preventing vulnerabilities rather than just reacting to them. These Secure by Design controls serve as baselines, enabling automated detection of deviations or misconfigurations.

Ongoing vulnerability management supported by controls testing ensures that risk mitigation continues to be effective. Vulnerability identification, assessment and remediation provides risk owners the evidence that continuous monitoring validates that controls remain effective against evolving threats.

By documenting vulnerability trends, patch cycles, and remediation effectiveness, organisations can demonstrate compliance with internal security standards and regulatory requirements.

Security Controls Testing confirms that identified security controls remain effective in mitigating risks over time. This provides evidence that risk management remains effective, giving confidence that security posture across the system’s lifecycle remains.

Sustaining an excellent security posture after deployment is crucial, as systems can become vulnerable due to configuration drift, outdated software, or new threat vectors. Continuous validation through testing identifies where changes may have occurred and provides opportunity to resolve them, realising several benefits:

• Security measures continue to deliver protection as intended.
• Controls are not bypassed or degraded over time.
• The service continues to mitigate known and emerging risks.

Verifying operational effectiveness of controls post-deployment, ensure that updates, patches, or changes have not compromised system security and that security policies are applied and enforced. This helps to identify deviations from approved baselines or misconfigurations and prevents drift from security standards that can introduce new vulnerabilities.

Tracking Progress and Maturity
Ongoing vulnerability management and through-life controls testing helps track how effectively the implementation of Secure by Design principles are across the organisation including:

• Trends, gaps, and analysis of recurring issues can help to refine the secure development lifecycle and ensure continuous improvement.
• Metrics from vulnerability management such as time to patch, frequency of critical vulnerabilities, or compliance with baseline configurations support strategic objectives.
• Track maturity in Secure by Design adoption.
• Identify gaps in implementation or effectiveness.
• Adapt and improve processes to close those gaps, aligning with continuous improvement.

Reinforcing Secure by Design Through-Life
Vulnerability management is central to the success of other Principles, supporting the measures adopted by validating that they remain effective or providing opportunity for improvement. It covers the ‘Detect’ part of ’Detect and Respond Security.’  and involves continuously:

• Identifying known weaknesses (e.g., unpatched software, misconfigurations).
• Assessing the risk and severity of those vulnerabilities.
• Prioritising and remediating based on impact.
• Monitoring for signs of exploitation.
• Testing to confirm resolution of vulnerabilities and that they do not reappear.

Integrating Vulnerability Management with other through-life assurance and operational measures ensures a more robust security management programme. These include:

Controls Testing: Regular testing validates that security controls (like patch management, access controls, logging) are effective in mitigating vulnerabilities and risks.
Logging, Monitoring & Alerting: Vulnerability scanners, SIEM tools, and endpoint detection systems provide real-time visibility into potential threats exploiting known weaknesses.
Incident Detection & Response: When a vulnerability is exploited, fast detection and coordinated response limit damage and prevent recurrence.
Continuous Iteration: Threat landscapes evolve, so vulnerability management must be a continuous process, not a one-time event.

Having minimised the attack surface (Principle 7) during the design and build of the capability, Vulnerability Management and Controls Testing helps to identify new attack vectors and validate that the capability can remain resistant.

Continuously scanning for and identifying known security weaknesses across systems, applications, and networks – detects vulnerabilities early.
• Unnecessary or outdated services/components can be disabled or removed.
• Exposed ports, APIs, or services can be secured. This reduces the number of potential entry points, shrinking the attack surface.

Vulnerabilities are prioritised based on severity, exploitability, and asset criticality:
• Issues are prioritised, preventing adversaries from targeting easily exploitable paths.
• Unused or low-utility components that present elevated risk can be removed or replaced.

Vulnerability management often uncovers over-privileged accounts or services, or components running with unnecessary permissions.
• Controls Testing identifies if gaps exist and then by remediating these findings, organisations can enforce the principle of Least Privilege and Minimised Functionality.
• These improvements ensure that only essential capabilities are exposed.

Vulnerability data informs threat models.
• Helps understand real-world attack vectors and the likelihood of compromise.
• Supports asset and risk management in focusing mitigation efforts where they matter most.

Ongoing vulnerability assessments ensure newly introduced components do not expand the attack surface unnecessarily. Supported by Controls testing, this validates that updates, patches, and configuration changes have not inadvertently reintroduced risk.

Vulnerability management is not just a technical function it is a continuous, evidence-based assurance process. When integrated within Secure by Design practices, it provides risk owners with confidence that security measures are both present and effective, supports the detection and resolution of implementation gaps, and helps ensure that systems remain resilient throughout their operational life.

Understanding the key challenges

Vulnerability management plays a crucial role in upholding Principle 5 and Principle 7, which emphasises the need for integrated capabilities to detect, respond to, and recover from security incidents. Principle 7 advocates reducing the number of exploitable points in a system, but in practice, achieving this while managing vulnerabilities is complex. Consequently, aligning vulnerability management practices with this principle comes with several challenges:

Visibility Gaps & Poorly Defined Ownership and Responsibilities:

  • Challenge: Incomplete asset inventories, and unmonitored/unscanned systems make it hard to detect vulnerabilities across the full attack surface. The lack of clarity over who owns which assets or components with users/developers unknowingly increase the attack surface.
  • Impact: Undetected vulnerabilities in these “blind spots” if exploited, hinder both detection and timely response. This leads to gaps in vulnerability remediation, attack surface monitoring, misconfigurations, unsafe code practices, and ignored security guidance.

Integrating DR Tools with Complex and Dynamic IT Environments:

  • Challenge: Modern infrastructures (cloud, containers, microservices) changing rapidly and the lack of integration between vulnerability scanners and SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) and/or EDR (Endpoint Detection & Response) platforms.
  • Impact: The constant changes make it hard to maintain an up-to-date view of the attack surface and it also limits the ability to correlate vulnerabilities with active threats or incidents, reducing effectiveness in prioritising or automating responses

Prioritisation of Risks & Patch Management Delays:

  • Challenge: Security teams may struggle to prioritise which vulnerabilities require immediate attention due to limited context (e.g., threat intelligence, exploitability, asset criticality). Once they have decided on a priority, patching can cause downtime or affect business operations, leading to delays.
  • Impact: Prolongs vulnerability exposure, especially in high-risk systems. Time and resources may be wasted on low-risk issues, while critical threats remain unaddressed.

Outdated Vulnerability Data and Integrating Legacy & Complex System Updates:

  • Challenge: Modification, update or decommissioning of older systems often results in significant cost or disruption. Careful consideration must be taken when updating components (e.g., third-party libraries, firmware, OS) as these can break existing functionality or introduce new vulnerabilities. And relying on outdated vulnerability databases or incomplete scanning (e.g., failing to detect zero-days or misconfigurations) does not help. Legacy systems may not have been developed with SbD principles in mind and can have undocumented vulnerabilities.
  • Impact: These systems increase the attack surface and may have un-patchable vulnerabilities. They can introduce weaknesses or incompatibilities in otherwise secure environments. This weakens the ability to proactively detect or prepare for exploitation attempts. It also becomes difficult to ensure that security controls still function post-update.

Organisational Silos:

  • Challenge: Vulnerability management is often handled by separate teams from incident response or threat detection.
  • Impact: Creates communication gaps, slows coordinated response, and leads to disjointed security workflows.

How a specialist Cyber Security Provider can help organisations to address these challenges

To help organisations overcome these challenges organisations who do not have the in-house skills, expertise or knowledge should engage with a specialist cyber security services provider. A reputable cyber security services provider should have a track record of and be able to deliver holistic and managed cyber security services which keeps people, data, systems, and technology infrastructure secure, resilient, and compliant. For example, at Cyberfort  we provide National Cyber Security Centre assured Consultancy services that leverage our technology, hosting, and Security Operations capabilities to Identify and protect against cyber-attacks, detect and respond to security incidents.

Our Managed services provide vulnerability management that integrates with threat detection capabilities, connecting scanners with SIEM and/or EDR platforms for better context and automation.

  • We use Risk-Based Prioritisation, leveraging common risk and severity scoring methods such as CVSS, asset values, exploit availability, and threat intelligence to prioritise vulnerabilities.
  • We implement continuous monitoring as a shift from periodic scanning to continuous assessment and detection.
  • We break down silos and encourage cross-team collaboration between vulnerability management, SOC, and IT operations.

Additionally, we reinforce the continuous monitoring regimes through proactive and reactive controls testing. Reactively done in response to risk or incident resolution, providing assurance that controls are in place and effective. Proactively testing controls baselines can be crucial for either identifying controls weaknesses which lead to risks or mitigating issues before they become risks in the future by validating controls are effective. Whilst vulnerability management tends to focus on the technology landscape, controls testing can consider validation of the people, process, and procedural controls.

Reactive testing from external audits has included the review of Joiners, Movers, Leavers (JML) processes, to identify issues within the Leavers part of the current JML process that is in place that were resulting in unrevoked accounts.

Proactive controls testing conducted as a gap analysis against expected policy implementations to ensure that conformance by the business and those supporting the business in functions. An example of this validated that contractors with permission to craft and modify code held the correct vetting status, as per the businesses vetting policy set in place by the CISO.

Cyberfort
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.