Search Results

SHIKSHA ROY | DATE: APRIL 25, 2025 The rise of smart factories powered by IoT-driven manufacturing has revolutionized production efficiency, automation, and data analytics. However, this digital transformation also introduces new vulnerabilities—cyber-physical attacks—where hackers can move beyond data theft to sabotage industrial operations physically. For manufacturing plants relying on interconnected devices, a single breach can halt production, damage equipment, or even endanger workers. This blog explores how hackers could sabotage IoT-driven manufacturing plants and why partnering with a cyber security company or data protection company is critical to mitigating these threats. How Hackers Exploit Smart Factories Smart factories rely heavily on IoT devices, sensors, and interconnected systems to optimize production processes. While these technologies enhance efficiency, they also create numerous entry points for cyber attackers. Hackers can exploit vulnerabilities in these systems to gain unauthorized access, disrupt operations, and cause physical damage. Disrupting Industrial IoT (IIoT) Devices Smart factories depend on network security detection to monitor IoT sensors, robotic arms, and conveyor belts. Hackers can inject malware to manipulate machinery, causing malfunctions, exploit weak cloud security solutions to hijack control systems and use ransomware attacks to lock operators out of critical systems until a ransom is paid. A vulnerability assessment in cyber security can identify weak points before attackers do. Manipulating Production Lines Cybercriminals can alter programmable logic controllers (PLCs) to overheat equipment, leading to costly repairs, change product specifications, resulting in defective batches and also trigger emergency shutdowns, causing massive downtime. Penetration testing in cyber security helps simulate such attacks to strengthen defenses. Stealing or Corrupting Sensitive Data Manufacturers store proprietary designs, supply chain details, and customer data. A breach could lead to intellectual property theft, compliance violations under cybersecurity & data privacy laws and financial losses from leaked trade secrets. A secure email company and malware protection solutions can prevent data exfiltration. Physical Sabotage Through Cyber Means Some of the most dangerous attacks include: Overriding safety protocols to disable alarms or emergency stops, tampering with security camera systems for business, allowing intruders to go undetected and hacking commercial surveillance cameras to spy on operations. Investing in professional security camera installation near me and remote security monitoring ensures physical security aligns with cyber defenses. How to Protect Smart Factories from Cyber-Physical Attacks To safeguard smart factories from cyber-physical attacks, manufacturers should adopt a comprehensive cybersecurity strategy that includes: Partner with a Managed Service Provider (MSP) for Cyber Security An MSP IT company specializing in managed IT solutions near me can provide: 24-hour IT support for immediate incident response, managed network services to monitor threats in real time and provide cyber security training for employees to recognize phishing and social engineering. Top MSP companies offer cyber risk consulting to align security with business goals. Conduct Regular Security Audits & Risk Assessments Penetration assessment and cyber threat simulation uncover weaknesses. A cyber security risk assessment methodology helps prioritize fixes. Third-party risk management ensures vendors don’t introduce vulnerabilities. Implement Strong Access Controls & Monitoring Use secure email and multi-factor authentication (MFA). Implement network security detection tools to identify unusual activities. Limit access based on roles to safeguard personal and company data. Invest in Employee Cybersecurity Awareness Small business cyber security training reduces human error risks. Cybersecurity awareness training for employees teaches best practices. Regular ransomware assessment drills prepare teams for real attacks. Strengthen Physical & Digital Surveillance Install commercial security camera systems with encrypted feeds. Use wireless security cameras for business with cybersecurity protection. Ensure CCTV camera installation covers critical entry points. Final Thoughts: Secure Your Factory Before Hackers Strike As cyber security threats for small businesses grow, manufacturers must adopt a proactive approach. Partnering with a cybersecurity compliance company, conducting vulnerability testing in cyber security, and leveraging cyber security risk management strategies can prevent catastrophic disruptions. Whether you need cybersecurity help, IT consulting services near me, or managed technical services, taking action now can safeguard your factory’s future. Is your smart factory secure? Contact a cyber security expert today to secure my network and stay ahead of evolving threats. Citations Synoptek. (2025, January 27). Cybersecurity for smart factories to manage Risks | Synoptek. https://synoptek.com/insights/it-blogs/cybersecurity/cybersecurity-for-smart-factories-to-manage-risks/ Witts, J. (2025, April 2). The top 5 biggest cybersecurity threats that small businesses face and how to stop them. Expert Insights. https://expertinsights.com/endpoint-security/the-top-5-biggest-cyber-security-threats-that-small-businesses-face-and-how-to-stop-them James, K. (2025, February 4). Vulnerability Assessment in Cybersecurity: A Complete guide (2025) - Cybersecurity for Me. Cybersecurity For Me. https://cybersecurityforme.com/vulnerability-assessment/ Legaspi, A. (2024, June 18). 10 Key challenges and cybersecurity solutions for smart factories. Dataguard36. https://data-guard365.com/manufacturing/10-key-challenges-and-cybersecurity-solutions-for-smart-factories-in-manufacturing/   Image Citations Optiproerpadmin. (2024, January 16). Explore smart manufacturing trends in 2024. ERP For Manufacturers | Manufacturing Software | OptiProERP. https://www.optiproerp.com/blog/explore-smart-manufacturing-trends/

MINAKSHI DEBNATH | DATE: APRIL 22,2025 Introduction In an era when the digital and orbital realms are more interconnected than ever, space cybersecurity has emerged as a critical priority. Satellites are vital to global communications, navigation, scientific research, and national security. However, their increasing dependence on digital infrastructure makes them susceptible not only to natural space hazards but also to a rising tide of cyberattacks. This article explores the risks facing orbital infrastructure and how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming defense mechanisms to secure space assets. The Rising Risks to Orbital Infrastructure Satellites orbiting Earth are no longer isolated systems but are interconnected through complex networks and ground control stations. This connectivity, while essential, also introduces vulnerabilities. Key risks include: Cyber Intrusions and Hijacking Malicious actors can infiltrate satellite systems to steal data, disrupt communications, or even take over control. Such attacks can involve spoofing signals, injecting malicious commands, or jamming transmissions. One notable concern is attackers gaining access to satellite command and control (C2) systems, which could allow them to reposition satellites, disable them, or even crash them into other space objects. Signal Jamming and Spoofing Signal interference remains a major threat. Jamming disrupts satellite communications by overwhelming them with noise, while spoofing sends fake signals that deceive navigation systems—jeopardizing everything from military operations to commercial flights. Software Vulnerabilities Much like terrestrial systems, satellites rely heavily on embedded software. These systems may contain outdated components, hardcoded credentials, or unpatched vulnerabilities, making them easy targets for attackers. Ground Station Attacks Often overlooked, ground control stations form a critical part of the satellite ecosystem. Attacks on these facilities can lead to disruptions in satellite operations or unauthorized data access, effectively turning the satellites themselves into tools of cyber warfare. Cosmic Threats: Natural Hazards in Orbit Beyond human-made threats, satellites face numerous environmental dangers: Solar Flares and Electromagnetic Pulses (EMPs):  These natural phenomena can damage satellite    electronics or disrupt signal transmission. Space Debris:   Collisions with orbital debris can physically damage or destroy satellites, causing cascading failures across orbital infrastructure. While these threats aren’t cybersecurity issues per se, the distinction blurs when satellites fail to report accurate data or get knocked offline, creating exploitable opportunities for cyber attackers. AI-Driven Cyber Defense Mechanisms Artificial intelligence is playing an increasingly pivotal role in defending space assets. Here's how AI is reshaping cybersecurity in orbit: Autonomous Threat Detection AI models can analyze satellite telemetry and communication patterns in real time, identifying anomalies such as unauthorized access or abnormal system behavior. Decentralized Security through Mesh Networks Some next-generation satellites operate in mesh networks where each unit can validate commands via peer satellites. AI algorithms help ensure that only legitimate instructions are accepted, using consensus models to block suspicious signals. Predictive Risk Analysis Machine learning systems assess historical data and threat intelligence to predict likely attack vectors or failure scenarios, allowing for proactive patching or system reconfiguration. Post-Quantum Encryption AI is also being used to test and implement post-quantum cryptographic protocols that can withstand future threats posed by quantum computers. International Collaboration and Policy Challenges Securing space assets requires more than just technical solutions—it demands coordinated global policy. While many nations have begun forming space cyber commands, there's a lack of standardized frameworks for cyber norms in space. Entities like NATO and the United Nations have urged for multilateral cooperation, yet legal and jurisdictional ambiguities persist. Conclusion As reliance on satellites grows across sectors, from weather forecasting and GPS to military reconnaissance and financial systems, the imperative to secure orbital infrastructure intensifies. AI-powered defense tools are proving indispensable in this fight, helping to detect, mitigate, and respond to both cyber and cosmic threats in real time. The future of space cybersecurity lies in integrating advanced technology with proactive policy—and ensuring that every new satellite launched is as secure as it is innovative. Citation/References: eccuedu. (2025, February 24). The future of Cybersecurity in Space: Securing satellites and space missions . Eccuedu. https://www.eccu.edu/blog/the-future-of-cybersecurity-in-space-securing-satellites-and-space-missions/ (28) Space Cyber Warfare: How hackers could target satellites and space infrastructure. | LinkedIn. (2024, November 20). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/space-cyber-warfare-how-hackers-could-target-satellites-verma-bhpcc/ Khan, S. K., Shiwakoti, N., Diro, A., Molla, A., Gondal, I., & Warren, M. (2024). Space cybersecurity challenges, mitigation techniques, anticipated readiness, and future directions. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection , 47 , 100724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2024.100724 Robinson, R. (2025, April 4). ENISA report warns of rising cyber risks to orbital infrastructure . ComplexDiscovery. https://complexdiscovery.com/enisa-report-warns-of-rising-cyber-risks-to-orbital-infrastructure/ Oloyede, J. (2024). AI-Driven Cybersecurity Solutions: Enhancing defense mechanisms in the Digital Era. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4976103 Image Citations: (28) Cybersecurity of Space Systems | LinkedIn. (2024, February 24). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cybersecurity-space-systems-chuck-brooks-i0c3e/ IEEEadmin. (2023, May 8). Cybersecurity in orbit: The growing vulnerability of space-based systems - IEEE transmitter . IEEE Transmitter. https://transmitter.ieee.org/cybersecurity-in-orbit-the-growing-vulnerability-of-space-based-systems/ 𝑺𝙃𝑬𝙇𝑳𝙀𝒀�. (2024, November 23). Cosmic Rays and Bitrot: The Silent Threat from Space to HDDs on Earth. Medium . https://medium.com/h7w/the-silent-threat-from-space-to-hdds-on-earth-cosmic-rays-and-bitrot-3b33a5a6be62 Chandolu, D. W. (2024, August 31). Artificial intelligence and cybersecurity: a new era of defense . Cyber Defense Magazine. https://www.cyberdefensemagazine.com/artificial-intelligence-and-cybersecurity-a-new-era-of-defense/

MINAKSHI DEBNATH | DATE: APRIL 23,2025 Introduction          In an era where information is currency, cybercrime has evolved into one of the most significant threats to individuals, organizations, and governments alike. Behind the complex codes and advanced technologies lies a human mind—a hacker—driven by a multitude of psychological, social, and economic factors. Understanding the psychology of cybercriminals not only sheds light on their motives and methods but also enhances the development of effective cybersecurity strategies. This paper explores the hacker mindset, categorizing types of hackers, their motivations, psychological traits, and the sociocultural influences that shape their behaviour. Motivations Behind Cybercrime Cybercriminals are driven by a variety of motivations: Financial Gain: Many hackers, especially those involved in ransomware and phishing, are primarily motivated by monetary rewards. ​ Ideological Beliefs (Hacktivism): Some hackers are driven by political or social ideologies, targeting organizations they oppose to promote their beliefs. ​ Curiosity and Challenge: The intellectual challenge and curiosity about system vulnerabilities can motivate individuals to hack, seeking the thrill of overcoming complex systems. ​ Desire for Recognition:  Achieving status within hacker communities can be a significant motivator, with individuals seeking acknowledgment for their skills. ​ Psychological Traits of Cybercriminals Research suggests that many cybercriminals exhibit unique psychological traits that differentiate them from conventional criminals. Cognitive Complexity and Problem-Solving Skills Hackers often possess advanced analytical skills and enjoy solving complex problems. This intellectual challenge can be a primary motivator, especially among young, skilled individuals with strong technical acumen (Holt et al., 2015). Low Empathy and Detachment Many cybercriminals demonstrate a level of emotional detachment from their victims. The virtual nature of their crimes allows them to rationalize harmful actions by creating psychological distance (Chiesa, Ducci, & Ciappi, 2008). Narcissism and Ego Gratification Some hackers are driven by a desire for recognition or to prove superiority over institutions. Narcissistic tendencies, including grandiosity and a need for admiration, can play a significant role (Rogers, 2010). Antisocial Personality Traits Certain hackers display antisocial traits such as deceitfulness, impulsivity, and a disregard for social norms. These traits are often seen in those engaging in cyberstalking, identity theft, or revenge-based attacks (Rogers, Smoak, & Liu, 2006). Manipulation Techniques Employed Cybercriminals often exploit human psychology through: Social Engineering: Manipulating individuals into divulging confidential information by exploiting trust and authority. ​ Exploiting Cognitive Biases: Creating a sense of urgency or scarcity to prompt impulsive decisions, bypassing rational thinking. Typologies of Hackers Hackers are not a monolithic group. They can be classified into several types based on their intentions and activities:   Black Hat Hackers: These are the traditional cybercriminals who exploit vulnerabilities for personal gain or to cause harm. They are often driven by financial incentives, ideological motives, or thrill-seeking behavior (Holt, 2010). White Hat Hackers: Also known as ethical hackers, they use their skills to improve cybersecurity by identifying vulnerabilities before malicious actors can exploit them (Bachmann, 2010). Gray Hat Hackers: These individuals fall somewhere between black and white hats. They may violate ethical standards or laws but without malicious intent—often exposing security flaws without permission (Jordan & Taylor, 2004). Hacktivists: These hackers use their skills to promote political or social agendas, engaging in cyber activities like website defacements or data leaks to draw attention to their causes (Denning, 1999). Implications for Cybersecurity Understanding the psychological aspects of cybercriminals aids in:​ Developing Targeted Interventions: Tailoring cybersecurity measures to address specific motivations and behaviours. Enhancing Awareness Programs:   Educating individuals about manipulation tactics to reduce susceptibility. Informing Law Enforcement Strategies: Utilizing psychological insights to predict and prevent cybercriminal activities.​ Conclusion Cybercrime is as much a psychological and social phenomenon as it is a technical one. Hackers operate with varied motivations and psychological profiles, influenced by their environments and peer networks. By understanding the hacker mindset, cybersecurity professionals, law enforcement, and policymakers can develop more nuanced strategies to deter and counteract cybercriminal activities. Moving forward, integrating psychological insights into cybersecurity frameworks will be essential for staying ahead of increasingly sophisticated cyber threats. Citation/References: (28) The Psychology of Cybercriminals: Understanding the mind of a hacker | LinkedIn. (2023, March 28). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/psychology-cybercriminals-understanding-mind-hacker-sharma/ (28) Psychological Analysis of Hackers: Behavioral and Psychological motivations behind Cyber Attacks | LinkedIn. (2025, February 13). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/psychological-analysis-hackers-behavioral-motivations-adel-abed-ali-dkkge/ Institute of Data. (2024, July 1). Exploring the Psychology of Cyber Attacks: The Attacker's Mind | Institute of Data. Institute of Data. https://www.institutedata.com/sg/blog/the-psychology-of-cyber-attacks/?utm Meetup, H. (2024, February 6). Understanding the psychology behind cyber crimes. - The Hackers Meetup - medium. Medium. https://thehackersmeetup.medium.com/understanding-the-psychology-behind-cyber-crimes-235ab3360078 Global Cyber Security Network. (2024, November 13). Exploring the psychology behind cyber attacks | GCS Network. https://globalcybersecuritynetwork.com/blog/the-psychology-behind-cyber-attacks/?utm Writer, S. (2025, March 10). Hacker motives: understanding the psychology behind cybercrime — Retail Technology Innovation Hub. Retail Technology Innovation Hub. https://retailtechinnovationhub.com/home/2025/3/6/hacker-motives-understanding-the-psychology-behind-cybercrime Team, I. I. (2024, June 17). Hacking the mind – understanding cybercriminal motivations. Insight IT. https://www.insightit.com.au/understanding-cybercriminal-motivations/ The psychology of hackers. (n.d.). https://its.ucsc.edu/news/psychology-of-hackers.html Image Citations: (28) Psychological Analysis of Hackers: Behavioral and Psychological motivations behind Cyber Attacks | LinkedIn. (2025, February 13). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/psychological-analysis-hackers-behavioral-motivations-adel-abed-ali-dkkge/ Rakshitakitra. (2024, April 16). Understanding the mind of a hacker - Akitra . https://akitra.com/understanding-the-mind-of-a-hacker/ Meetup, H. (2024, February 6). Understanding the psychology behind cyber crimes. - The Hackers Meetup - medium. Medium . https://thehackersmeetup.medium.com/understanding-the-psychology-behind-cyber-crimes-235ab3360078 Global Cyber Security Network. (2024, November 13). Exploring the psychology behind cyber attacks | GCS Network . https://globalcybersecuritynetwork.com/blog/the-psychology-behind-cyber-attacks/?utm What is hacking? types of hacking & more | Fortinet. (n.d.). Fortinet. https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/what-is-hacking

SHILPI MONDAL| DATE: APRIL 25,2025 The Role of AI in State-Sponsored Cyber Conflicts: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing the landscape of cyber warfare, enabling nations to automate and enhance their digital offensive and defensive capabilities. State-sponsored cyber conflicts have become more sophisticated, with AI playing a pivotal role in executing and defending against cyberattacks.​ AI-Powered Cyber Offensives: State actors are increasingly leveraging AI to conduct cyberattacks that are faster, more adaptive, and harder to detect. AI algorithms can automate the identification of vulnerabilities in target systems, enabling rapid exploitation. For instance, AI-driven tools can scan vast networks to find weaknesses, facilitating large-scale attacks with minimal human intervention.​ Moreover, AI enhances the effectiveness of phishing campaigns through the generation of highly personalized and convincing messages, increasing the likelihood of successful breaches. Deepfake technology, powered by AI, is also being used to impersonate individuals and manipulate public opinion, further complicating the cyber threat landscape.​ Defensive Applications of AI: On the defensive side, AI is instrumental in bolstering cybersecurity measures. ​Cybersecurity firms are increasingly utilizing artificial intelligence to monitor digital environments in real-time, identifying unusual patterns and anomalies that may signal potential threats. This proactive approach allows for quicker mitigation of threats and reduces the potential impact of cyberattacks.​ Managed service providers (MSPs) are integrating AI into their cybersecurity offerings, providing small businesses with advanced protection against cyber threats. These services include malware protection, ransomware assessment, penetration testing, and vulnerability assessments, all enhanced by AI's ability to process and analyze large datasets efficiently.​ Implications for Small Businesses: Small businesses are particularly vulnerable to cyber threats due to limited resources and expertise. ​AI-powered cybersecurity solutions provide small businesses with cost-effective and robust protection against cyber threats. Cybersecurity training programs, often provided by MSPs, educate employees on best practices, reducing the risk of human error leading to security breaches.​ Furthermore, AI-powered tools assist in achieving cybersecurity compliance, ensuring that small businesses meet regulatory requirements and protect customer data. Services such as secure email, network security detection, and cloud security solutions are now more accessible, helping small businesses safeguard their digital assets. The Global Cybersecurity Landscape: ​As nations increasingly integrate artificial intelligence into their cyber warfare strategies, the global cybersecurity landscape is becoming more intricate and challenging to navigate. Cyber risk consulting firms are essential in helping organizations navigate this environment, offering services like cyber exposure management and third-party risk management.​ The integration of AI into cyber operations necessitates ongoing cybersecurity awareness training for employees and the implementation of robust risk management frameworks. By staying informed and adopting AI-enhanced cybersecurity measures, organizations can better protect themselves against the evolving threats posed by state -sponsored cyber conflicts.​ Conclusion: AI's role in state-sponsored cyber conflicts underscores the need for advanced cybersecurity strategies. Organizations, especially small businesses, must leverage AI-driven solutions and services provided by cybersecurity companies and MSPs to defend against sophisticated cyber threats. Continuous training, compliance, and risk assessment are critical components in maintaining robust cybersecurity defenses in the age of AI-driven cyber warfare.​ Citations: Ec-Council. (2024, August 30). AI in Cyber Warfare: AI-Powered Attacks and Defense. Cybersecurity Exchange. https://www.eccouncil.org/cybersecurity-exchange/cyber-talks/ai-in-cyber-warfare/ LlM, L. L. (2025, February 25). Artificial intelligence and State-Sponsored Cyber Espionage: The growing threat of AI-Enhanced hacking and global security implications. NYU Journal of Intellectual Property & Entertainment Law. https://jipel.law.nyu.edu/artificial-intelligence-and-state-sponsored-cyber-espionage/ Kirichenko, D. (2025, April 8). How will artificial intelligence impact battlefield operations? Default. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/how-will-artificial-intelligence-impact-battlefield-operations Image Citations: Benmoussa, M. (2024, April 25). AI on the Battlefield: Revolutionizing Modern Warfare . Blog Economie Numérique. https://blog.economie-numerique.net/2024/04/25/ai-on-the-battlefield-revolutionizing-modern-warfare/ Zone, H. (2025, March 10). 10 AI-Powered Tools for Offensive Security in 2025 (Expert-Approved) . Hackzone Cyber Security Blog. https://hackzone.in/blog/ai-offensive-security-tools-2025/ Cybersecurity: 5 risks from supply chain interdependencies . (2025, March 21). World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/01/5-risk-factors-supply-chain-interdependencies-cybersecurity/

JUKTA MAJUMDAR | DATE April 28, 2025 Introduction As technology continues to evolve at breakneck speed, so do the tactics of cybercriminals. The cybersecurity threats of 2025 promise to be more complex, more aggressive, and harder to detect. For businesses, individuals, and governments alike, the stakes have never been higher. Staying ahead of the latest cyber threats requires a proactive mindset, the right tools, and a focus on smart prevention strategies. Understanding what’s coming—and how to counter it—will be essential for anyone looking to prevent cyber attacks and protect their digital assets.   Emerging Cybersecurity Threats for 2025 AI-Enhanced Cyber Attacks AI is not only helping defenders—it's empowering attackers, too. In 2025, we’ll see hackers using AI to create more realistic phishing emails, adapt malware in real time, and automate large-scale attacks. This makes detecting threats harder and demands better cybersecurity protection and cybersecurity awareness training for employees. Prevention Tip: Invest in cybersecurity & data privacy solutions powered by AI that can recognize and block AI-based attacks. Regular cyber threat simulation exercises will prepare your team to recognize sophisticated intrusion attempts.   Ransomware Evolves Into "Double Extortion" Ransomware isn’t going anywhere. In fact, it’s evolving. New strains not only encrypt data but also steal it, threatening public release unless the ransom is paid. This trend will continue to dominate the cybersecurity threats 2025 landscape. Prevention Tip: Conduct regular ransomware assessment exercises and strengthen your cloud security solutions. Ensure your backups are offline and immutable, and partner with a data protection company to stay resilient.   IoT and Smart Device Exploits With the boom in smart homes and smart cities, unsecured IoT devices will become one of the top gateways for cybercriminals. Exploiting poorly secured devices could allow attackers access to corporate networks and personal data. Prevention Tip: Use penetration testing in cyber security to evaluate IoT vulnerabilities. Implement network security detection solutions and ensure all devices receive timely security patches.   Supply Chain and Third-Party Attacks Third-party vendors can introduce serious risks. Attackers are increasingly targeting service providers and integrating malware into trusted systems—making these breaches harder to detect and prevent. Prevention Tip: Implement robust third-party risk management practices. Demand cybersecurity compliance requirements from your partners and conduct a security risk assessment template review regularly.   Deepfakes and Synthetic Media Attacks Manipulated videos, audios, and texts—crafted by AI—are going to be weaponized at an alarming scale. These can be used for misinformation, fraud, or corporate espionage. Prevention Tip: Educate your teams with small business cyber security training and cybersecurity awareness training for employees. Develop strong internal communication checks to verify critical information.   General Prevention Strategies for 2025 Cybersecurity Risk Management Companies must embed cyber risk evaluation into every new project. Use tools like cyber exposure management and cyber consulting services to guide policies. Regular Vulnerability Testing Embrace regular vulnerability testing in cyber security and penetration assessment to catch flaws before attackers do. Dedicated IT Support Partner with top managed service provider companies or msp it companies for 24/7 monitoring, especially for small company IT support and managed technical services needs. Enhanced Email Security Use a secure email company and secure my network tools to guard against phishing and business email compromise. Physical Security Upgrades Combine cybersecurity with physical measures like commercial surveillance cameras, security camera system for business, and remote security monitoring. Conclusion The latest cyber threats of 2025 are more sophisticated, more interconnected, and potentially more damaging than anything we've seen before. Yet, with the right strategies, it's possible to stay ahead. Organizations that invest in cybersecurity protection, conduct regular cyber risk management assessments, and build a culture of cyber awareness will be far better positioned to prevent cyber attacks. Now is the time to strengthen your defenses. From advanced cloud security solutions to secure email practices and beyond, a layered, proactive approach to cybersecurity is the best path forward in the face of tomorrow’s digital dangers.   Citations Cybrary. (2025). Top 10 cybersecurity threats in 2025 and how to mitigate them. Cybrary. Retrieved from https://www.cybrary.it/blog/top-10-cybersecurity-threats-2025   Google Cloud. (2025). Emerging threats: Cybersecurity forecast 2025. Google Cloud. Retrieved from https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/threat-intelligence/cybersecurity-forecast-2025/   SentinelOne. (2025). 10 cyber security trends for 2025. SentinelOne. Retrieved from https://www.sentinelone.com/cybersecurity-101/cybersecurity/cyber-security-trends/     Image Citations Cybersecurity Threats 2025: The top trends and how to address them | LMG Security. (n.d.). LMG Security. https://www.lmgsecurity.com/cybersecurity-threats-2025-the-top-trends-and-how-to-address-them/   Devs, W. (2024, December 18). Top cybersecurity threats in 2025: a forecast. Downtown Computers. https://www.downtowncomputers.com/top-cybersecurity-threats-in-2025-a-forecast/

SWARNALI GHOSH| DATE: MAY 09, 2025 Introduction In an era where data privacy is paramount and cyber threats are increasingly sophisticated, organisations face the challenge of enhancing their cybersecurity measures without compromising sensitive information. Federated learning (FL) emerges as a revolutionary approach, enabling collaborative cybersecurity efforts without the need to share raw data. In an era where cyber threats are growing in sophistication and scale, organisations face a critical dilemma: how to collaborate on cybersecurity without compromising sensitive data. Traditional methods of sharing threat intelligence often require exchanging datasets, which can expose proprietary information or violate privacy regulations. Enter  federated cybersecurity —a revolutionary approach that enables organisations to strengthen their defences  without directly sharing data .   Understanding Federated Learning in Cybersecurity   Federated learning is a decentralised machine learning technique where multiple entities (clients) collaboratively train a shared model while keeping their data localised. Instead of transferring raw data to a central server, each client processes data locally and shares only model updates, such as gradients or parameters. This approach ensures data privacy and security, making it particularly suitable for cybersecurity applications where sensitive information is involved. In the context of cybersecurity, FL allows organisations to collectively improve threat detection models by learning from diverse datasets without exposing proprietary or confidential information. This collaborative intelligence enhances the ability to detect and respond to cyber threats more effectively. Federated cybersecurity is a collaborative security framework where multiple organisations  collectively analyse threats and improve defences without exchanging raw data . Instead of pooling datasets into a central repository, this model relies on  decentralised computation , allowing participants to derive insights while keeping their data private.   Key Principles of Federated Cybersecurity   Data Privacy Preservation: Organisations retain control over their data, sharing only aggregated insights or anonymised metadata.   Decentralised Analysis: Threat intelligence is processed locally, with only results (not raw data) shared across the network.   Machine Learning & AI Integration:   Federated learning allows AI models to be trained across multiple sources without direct data exposure. Regulatory Compliance: Helps organisations adhere to GDPR, HIPAA, and other data protection laws by minimising data transfers. This approach is particularly valuable in industries like  finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure , where data sensitivity is paramount. Applications of Federated Learning in Cybersecurity Threat Detection and Anomaly Identification:   Conventional threat detection methods frequently fall short in identifying and responding to the rapidly shifting tactics used by cyber attackers. FL enables real-time monitoring and collective analysis by pooling insights from diverse sources without exposing sensitive data. This dynamic approach allows for faster and more accurate identification of anomalies and potential threats.   Malware Detection and Classification: Malware constantly adapts to evade detection. FL brings a collective perspective to this challenge, allowing different organisations to contribute to robust malware classifiers without revealing specific datasets. The result is a more resilient defence against the ever-changing landscape of cyber threats.   Predictive Analysis for Cyber Attacks:   FL enhances predictive models by collaboratively analysing historical data from various entities. This proactive stance allows organisations to foresee potential attack vectors and adapt their defences accordingly, thwarting cyber threats before they strike.   Collaborative Defence Strategies:   FL's collaborative nature enables organisations, even competitors, to share threat intelligence without exposing critical information. By working together, organisations can build a more resilient defence network, strengthening their overall cybersecurity framework against shared threats.   Privacy-Preserving Intrusion Detection:   By keeping sensitive data local and sharing only anonymised insights, FL allows organisations to collectively identify new patterns of unauthorised access without compromising user confidentiality. This balance between privacy and security is crucial in today's data-sensitive environment.   Advantages of Federated Learning in Cybersecurity   Data Privacy and Compliance:   FL ensures that sensitive data remains within its originating location, aligning with stringent data protection regulations such as GDPR and CCPA. This adherence to data sovereignty laws is crucial for organisations operating across multiple jurisdictions.   Enhanced Model Robustness:   Training on diverse datasets from various sources makes models more adaptable and resilient. This diversity reduces the risk of biases and improves the model's ability to generalise across different scenarios.   Reduced Risk of Data Breaches:   Since data is not transferred to a central server, the risk of data breaches during transmission is significantly reduced. This decentralised approach minimises potential vulnerabilities associated with data aggregation. Scalability and Efficiency:   FL allows for scalable model training across numerous devices or organisations without the need for centralised data storage. This scalability is particularly beneficial for large-scale cybersecurity applications.   Challenges and Considerations   While federated cybersecurity offers significant advantages, it is not without hurdles-   Computational Overhead:   Encryption and decentralised processing require  more resources  than traditional methods.   Standardisation Issues:    Lack of universal protocols can hinder interoperability between different federated systems.   Trust & Adoption Barriers:  Some organisations remain sceptical about  indirect data sharing  and prefer traditional methods.   Latency in Threat Response:  Federated models may introduce delays compared to real-time centralised threat feeds.   Data Quality and Consistency:   Ensuring the quality and consistency of data across different clients is challenging. Variations in data formats, pre-processing methods, and quality can affect the performance of the global model.   Security of Model Updates:   While FL protects raw data, the shared model updates can still be vulnerable to attacks. Protecting model updates requires advanced methods like secure aggregation and differential privacy to ensure sensitive information remains confidential.   Malicious Participants: Detecting and mitigating the impact of malicious participants who may submit poisoned data or model updates is a significant concern. Implementing robust validation and anomaly detection mechanisms is crucial.   Resource Constraints:   FL can be computationally intensive, requiring significant processing power and bandwidth. Organisations must ensure they have the necessary infrastructure to support FL operations.   Real-World Implementations Financial Sector:  Fighting Fraud Without Sharing Customer Data- Banks and fintech firms use federated learning to detect  fraudulent transactions  without exposing customer records. For example, SWIFT’s Customer Security Programme (CSP)  encourages collaborative defence without direct data sharing. JPMorgan Chase  has explored federated AI to enhance anti-money laundering (AML) efforts. Healthcare:   Secure Medical Threat Intelligence Hospitals and research institutions collaborate on  cyber-physical threats  (like ransomware targeting medical devices) without violating patient confidentiality. Critical Infrastructure:   Protecting National Assets, Government agencies and energy providers use federated models to defend against  state-sponsored cyberattacks  while keeping operational data confidential. Enterprise Security: Cross-Company Threat Hunting Companies like  IBM Security  and  Palo Alto Networks  integrate federated techniques into their threat intelligence platforms to help clients share insights safely.   Future Outlook   As cyber threats continue to evolve, the adoption of federated learning in cybersecurity is expected to grow. Ongoing research aims to address current challenges, enhance the robustness of FL systems, and develop standardised protocols for broader implementation. Organisations looking to bolster their cybersecurity posture should consider integrating FL into their strategies, balancing the need for collaboration with the imperative of data privacy. As cyber threats evolve, federated cybersecurity will play an increasingly vital role in  global cyber defence strategies . Emerging trends include-   Blockchain-based threat sharing:   For tamper-proof collaboration. AI-driven autonomous federated systems:   That dynamically adapt to new threats. Government-backed federated initiatives:   S uch as the  EU’s NIS2 Directive , promote cross-border cyber collaboration. Conclusion   Federated cybersecurity represents a  paradigm shift  in how organisations defend against cyber threats. By enabling  secure, privacy-preserving collaboration , it addresses critical challenges in threat intelligence sharing while complying with stringent data protection laws. As more industries adopt this model, we can expect a  more resilient, interconnected cyber defence ecosystem —one where organisations work together  without sacrificing data privacy .   Citations/References Enterprise Security Solutions | IBM. (n.d.). https://www.ibm.com/security NIS2 Directive: new rules on cybersecurity of network and information systems. (n.d.). Shaping Europe’s Digital Future. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/nis2-directive Customer Security Programme (CSP) | SWIFT. (n.d.). Swift. https://www.swift.com/myswift/customer-security-programme-csp Wikipedia contributors. (2025, March 9). Federated learning. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federated_learning How is federated learning applied in security analytics? (n.d.). https://milvus.io/ai-quick-reference/how-is-federated-learning-applied-in-security-analytics Manzoor, H. U., Shabbir, A., Chen, A., Flynn, D., & Zoha, A. (2024). A survey of security strategies in Federated Learning: Defending models, data, and Privacy. Future Internet, 16 (10), 374. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi16100374 Secure AI. (2024, November 22). Harnessing the power of federated learning for enhanced cybersecurity. Medium. https://medium.com/%40secureai/harnessing-the-power-of-federated-learning-for-enhanced-cybersecurity-b42cb8ab3ac9 Pal, S. (2024, November 23). Applications of Federated Learning in Cyber-Security & Threat Intelligence | Medium. Medium. https://techunits.com/applications-of-federated-learning-in-cybersecurity-d599e33a3fe1 Liu, P., Xu, X., & Wang, W. (2022). Threats, attacks and defences to federated learning: issues, taxonomy and perspectives. Cybersecurity, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42400-021-00105-6   Image Citations Adams, D. (2024, August 15). Federal cybersecurity efforts seek to improve the protection of health data. Journal of AHIMA. https://journal.ahima.org/page/federal-cybersecurity-efforts-seek-to-improve-protection-of-health-data Mark. (2024, May 28). Federated Learning: Collaborative AI Training without Sharing Raw Data. Zipfian Academy. https://www.zipfianacademy.com/federated-learning/ The Intersection of AI and Cybersecurity: A Double-Edged Sword | LinkedIn. (2024, September 13). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/intersection-ai-cybersecurity-double-edged-sword-kelly-hammons-mdeac/ Hill, M. (2023, November 4). Exploring the intricacies of DMZ cybersecurity - CyberExperts.com . CyberExperts.com . https://cyberexperts.com/dmz-cyber-security/

ARPITA (BISWAS) MAJUMDER | DATE: DECEMBER 23, 2024 Ransomware attacks have surged in recent years, posing significant threats to individuals, businesses, and governments. The malicious software attacks encrypt victims' data, demanding payment for decryption keys. As cybercriminals become more sophisticated, traditional cybersecurity measures often struggle to keep pace. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a formidable ally in the fight against ransomware, offering advanced capabilities to detect, prevent, and respond to these threats. Understanding Ransomware and Its Evolution Ransomware is a type of malware that restricts access to data or systems, typically by encryption, until a ransom is paid. The evolution of ransomware has seen the development of more complex variants, capable of evading traditional security measures and causing widespread disruption. The increasing sophistication of these attacks necessitates equally advanced defense mechanisms.   The Role of AI in Ransomware Défense   AI strengthens cybersecurity by processing large volumes of data, detecting patterns, and enabling real-time decision-making. In the context of ransomware, AI contributes in several key areas:   Real-Time Threat Detection:  AI systems can monitor network traffic and user behaviour to detect anomalies indicative of ransomware activity. Machine learning algorithms analyse patterns to identify potential threats before they execute malicious actions. For instance, AI-driven Extended Detection and Response (XDR) platforms enable analysts to quickly identify malicious chains of behavior and detect complex ransomware attack sequences earlier, allowing for swift remediation of known and unknown threats. Behavioural Analysis:  Unlike traditional signature-based detection, AI employs behavioural analysis to identify suspicious activities. By understanding normal system behaviour, AI can detect deviations that may indicate a ransomware attack, even if the specific malware variant is previously unknown. AI-supported cyber analysis and behaviour-based detection models enable cybersecurity teams to detect attacker activities across all stages of the ransomware cyber kill chain.   Automated Response:  AI can automate responses to detected threats, such as isolating affected systems, terminating malicious processes, and initiating data backups. This rapid response minimizes the potential damage caused by ransomware attacks. AI systems can detect and respond to ransomware threats in real-time, bolstering the robustness of digital defenses.     Predictive Analysis: Through continuous learning, AI can predict potential vulnerabilities and attack vectors, allowing organizations to strengthen defenses proactively. By analysing trends and emerging threats, AI helps in anticipating and mitigating future ransomware attacks.   AI-Powered Ransomware: A Double-Edged Sword   While AI enhances defensive capabilities, it also presents new challenges. Cybercriminals are leveraging AI to develop more sophisticated ransomware that can adapt in real-time, modify its code to evade detection, and automate various stages of the attack process. This evolution underscores the need for advanced AI-driven defenses to counteract AI-powered threats.   Implementing AI in Cybersecurity Strategies   To effectively combat ransomware, organizations should consider integrating AI into their cybersecurity frameworks: Invest in AI-Driven Security Solutions:  Adopting AI-enabled cybersecurity tools can enhance threat detection and response capabilities, providing a robust defense against sophisticated ransomware attacks. With AI-enabled cybersecurity solutions, companies can mitigate the risks of ransomware attacks and minimize their impact.   Continuous Monitoring and Analysis:  AI systems require continuous data input to learn and adapt to new threats. Implementing real-time monitoring ensures that AI can detect and respond to ransomware attacks promptly.   Employee Training:  Mistakes made by employees are frequently a factor in the success of ransomware attacks. Training employees to recognize phishing attempts and adhere to security protocols complements AI defenses, creating a comprehensive security posture.   Collaboration with AI Experts:  Engaging with AI specialists can assist in developing customized solutions tailored to an organization's specific needs and threat landscape.   Challenges and Considerations   Although AI provides substantial benefits, its deployment is accompanied by certain obstacles: Resource Intensive:  Developing and maintaining AI-driven security systems can be resource-intensive, requiring substantial investment in technology and expertise.   False Positives/Negatives:  AI systems may produce false alerts, leading to unnecessary interventions, or fail to detect novel ransomware variants. Continuous refinement and training of AI models are essential to minimize these occurrences.   Ethical Concerns:  The use of AI in cybersecurity raises ethical considerations, particularly regarding privacy and the potential for misuse. Establishing clear guidelines and ethical standards is crucial to address these concerns.   Future Trends The role of AI in cybersecurity is expected to grow as ransomware attacks become more sophisticated. Future trends include:   AI-Driven Threat Intelligence:   AI will play a key role in gathering and analysing threat intelligence, providing organizations with real-time insights into emerging threats and vulnerabilities.   Integration with Other Technologies:   AI will increasingly be integrated with other technologies, such as blockchain and quantum computing, to enhance cybersecurity defenses and create more resilient systems.   Collaboration and Sharing:   Collaboration between organizations and sharing of threat intelligence will be crucial in the fight against ransomware. AI can facilitate this by automating the collection and dissemination of threat data. Conclusion   Artificial Intelligence plays a pivotal role in the ongoing battle against ransomware attacks. Its capabilities in real-time detection, behavioral analysis, automated response, and predictive analysis provide a robust framework for enhancing cybersecurity defenses. However, the dual-use nature of AI, with its potential exploitation by cybercriminals, necessitates a proactive and informed approach to its integration. By investing in AI-driven solutions and fostering a culture of continuous learning and adaptation, organizations can strengthen their resilience against the evolving threat of ransomware. Citations/References Freed, A. M. (n.d.). Ransomware vs. AI: The Battle Between Machines . https://www.cybereason.com/blog/ransomware-vs.-ai-the-battle-between-machines Role of artificial intelligence in combating ransomware | Featured editorials . (n.d.). https://www.ensigninfosecurity.com/resources/133 Luciahaines. (2024, December 9). The role of AI in defending against ransomware attacks - Zenzero. Zenzero . https://zenzero.co.uk/news/ai-against-ransomware Boss, R. (2024, December 11). The threat of AI-powered ransomware attacks . Pure Storage Blog. https://blog.purestorage.com/perspectives/the-threat-of-ai-powered-ransomware-attacks/ How AI is changing ransomware and how you can adapt to stay protected . (2023, November 14). Barrcuda Blog. https://blog.barracuda.com/2023/11/13/ai-ransomware-adapt-stay-protected How AI Detects and Prevents Ransomware Attacks – Rocheston U . (n.d.). https://u.rocheston.com/how-ai-detects-and-prevents-ransomware-attacks/ Ec-Council. (2024, December 5). Predicting the unpredictable: How AI is shaping ransomware attacks . Cybersecurity Exchange. https://www.eccouncil.org/cybersecurity-exchange/cyber-talks/predicting-the-unpredictable-how-ai-is-shaping-ransomware-attacks/ Editorial Staff. (2023, November 7). AI's Role In The Fight Against Ransomware: Trends And Strategies | Ecommerce Fastlane. eCommerce Fastlane . https://ecommercefastlane.com/ais-role-in-the-fight-against-ransomware/ Image Citations (27) The use of AI in detecting and preventing cybercrime | LinkedIn . (2023, March 28). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/use-ai-detecting-preventing-cybercrime-neil-sahota-%E8%90%A8%E5%86%A0%E5%86%9B-/ Drake, V. (2024, December 18). The history and evolution of ransomware attacks . Flashpoint. https://flashpoint.io/blog/the-history-and-evolution-of-ransomware-attacks/ Wiens, C. (2023, February 8). The Role of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Ransomware Protection: How Enterprises Can Leverage the Latest Technologies to Protect Themselves - MixMode . MixMode. https://mixmode.ai/blog/the-role-of-artificial-intelligence-and-machine-learning-in-ransomware-protection-how-enterprises-can-leverage-the-latest-technologies-to-protect-themselves/ Monika. (2024, September 10). AI in the role of catalyst and protector | Soitron . Soitron. https://www.soitron.com/ai-acts-as-both-a-catalyst-and-a-brake-for-ransomware-attacks/ Johnson , K. (2020, December 8). How AI is fighting - and could enable, ransomware attacks on cities. VentureBeat . https://venturebeat.com/ai/how-ai-is-fighting-and-could-enable-ransomware-attacks-on-cities/ About the Author Arpita (Biswas) Majumder is a key member of the CEO's Office at QBA USA, the parent company of AmeriSOURCE, where she also contributes to the digital marketing team. With a master’s degree in environmental science, she brings valuable insights into a wide range of cutting-edge technological areas and enjoys writing blog posts and whitepapers. Recognized for her tireless commitment, Arpita consistently delivers exceptional support to the CEO and to team members.

SWARNALI GHOSH | DATE: JUNE 20, 2025 Introduction   As the digital battlefield becomes the new theatre of war, legal scholars, governments, tech giants, and humanitarian organizations are asking: where do we draw the line? The existing Geneva Conventions, forged in an era of trenches and tanks, were never designed to apply to cyber operations. But with everything from power grids and hospitals to financial markets now targetable by code, the question of whether we need a “cyber Geneva Convention” is not just rhetorical—it’s urgent. Cyber warfare is no longer hypothetical. From Russia’s disruptive attacks on Ukraine’s infrastructure to China’s alleged espionage campaigns against U.S. critical systems, digital assaults are reshaping modern conflict 8. Unlike traditional warfare, cyber operations blur the lines between combatants and civilians, often causing collateral damage that spills across borders.   The Technology‑Neutral Foundation: Can Old Rules Fit New Means?   International humanitarian law (IHL), grounded in principles like distinction, proportionality, necessity, and humanity, is theoretically technology-neutral. The International Court of Justice affirmed in 1996 that IHL applies to all weapons, “including those of the future,” covering cyber operations during armed conflict. The ICRC supports this view, saying cyber operations in an armed conflict must obey IHL just like kinetic actions.   The Tallinn Manual: Non-Binding, Yet Influential   In response to growing legal uncertainty, the CCD COE and a group of experts published the Tallinn Manual  in 2013 to clarify how IHL applies to cyber operations. Following its success, Tallinn Manual 2.0  expanded its coverage in 2017, and Tallinn Manual 3.0  was launched in 2021 to address new technologies. These manuals restate IHL obligations (“black‑letter rules”) and offer commentary, yet remain purely academic and lack formal legal binding.   Real‑World Challenges: Attribution & Enforcement   Attribution Problem: Cyberattacks are often anonymous and routed through third countries, making it difficult to identify perpetrators. Legal Reviews (Art. 36 AP I):  States must review new weapons—including cyber tools—to determine legality under IHL. Evidence & Impact: Pinning responsibility on individuals or commanders remains tough. Also, assessing “seriousness” (whether an attack qualifies as a war crime) is complicated in the digital space. Emerging Norms & Accountability Mechanisms   International Criminal Court (ICC):  In September 2023, ICC lead prosecutor Karim Khan declared intent to investigate cyber attacks as war crimes, especially when civilian infrastructure is targeted. ICRC Voluntary ‘Hacker Code’:  In October 2023, the ICRC issued eight voluntary rules for civilian hackers in armed conflicts—akin to a “Geneva Code of cyber-war”—emphasizing protection of civilian objects and caution against indiscriminate malware. Microsoft’s “Digital Geneva Convention” Proposal:  A concept championed since 2017 by Microsoft, advocating three pillars: state restraint in cyberattacks, industry-led defense accords, and an independent investigative body. National Legal Reviews & Doctrines: Several countries (Canada, Costa Rica, Czechia, Germany, Switzerland, U.S.) have enacted national laws requiring legal reviews of cyber weapons under IHL. Schmitt Analysis: Developed by Tallinn Manual’s lead author, Michael Schmitt, this framework helps determine when cyber operations constitute “use of force” under the UN Charter.   The Case for a "Digital Geneva Convention"   Given these ambiguities, calls for a new cyber-specific treaty have grown louder. In 2017, Microsoft President Brad Smith put forward the idea of a 'Digital Geneva Convention,' calling on governments to: Safeguarding Civilians from State-Sponsored Cyber Operations:   Developing international norms to shield civilian populations from cyberattacks during conflicts. Protecting digital rights must mirror protections granted in kinetic warfare. Prohibiting Cyberattacks on Essential Civilian Infrastructure:   Ban cyber operations targeting critical services like hospitals, water systems, and power grids. Disruption of such infrastructure can have severe humanitarian consequences. Creating Cyber Accountability Mechanisms in Armed Conflicts: Establish independent bodies, similar to the Red Cross, to monitor and report cyber conduct during warfare. These institutions can promote transparency and uphold humanitarian law. Why a New Treaty?   Critical Infrastructure Is Vulnerable:   Over 100 countries are developing offensive cyber capabilities, yet few have laws shielding civilian systems . Private Sector’s Role: Tech firms like Microsoft often defend nations from cyberattacks— they should be bound by new norms. Global Harm: Cyber weapons don’t respect borders. A single attack can ripple worldwide (e.g., NotPetya).   Proponents argue a treaty could codify peacetime cyber norms, such as bans on attacking hospitals or water supplies, and mandate cooperation during crises.   The Case For—and Against—A New Cyber Geneva Convention   Arguments in Favor: Closing grey zones:  A specific convention could clarify key definitions: what constitutes an “attack,” what qualifies for civilian immunity, and what triggers proportional response. Establishing norms:  State and non-state actors would get clear, binding limits on cyber conduct. Enhanced enforcement:  Treaties could include verification, shared monitoring, and sanctions for violations.   Arguments Against: Attribution complexities:  Without clarity on perpetrators, enforcement remains elusive. Political fragmentation:  Rising nationalism, declining multilateralism, and techno-strategic rivalries make global consensus unlikely. Adaptability concerns:  Old-fashioned treaties are slow to negotiate and evolve—WHO hasn't updated its core Geneva law since 1977—whereas cyber evolves continuously.   What’s Next in the Cyber‑Legal Landscape?   The current landscape suggests a hybrid approach: Clarifying International Humanitarian Law (IHL) through Expert Analysis: Support ongoing initiatives like the Tallinn Manuals to interpret how IHL applies in cyber warfare. These expert-driven frameworks can guide lawful conduct and reduce ambiguity. Encouraging Voluntary Norms among Cyber Stakeholders:   Foster ethical behaviour by promoting voluntary codes of conduct for tech firms, states, and non-state actors. Such norms can fill legal gaps and build trust in cyberspace. Incorporating Cybercrimes into International Criminal Court (ICC) Practice: Expand ICC jurisdiction to address cyber-enabled war crimes and crimes against humanity. Setting legal precedents will deter malicious actors and promote accountability. Strengthening National Cyber Weapons Reviews with Transparency:   Mandate rigorous state-level reviews of cyber tools to ensure IHL compliance. Transparency and public reporting can build confidence and reduce arms race dynamics. Expanding UN Talks to Regulate Cyber Autonomy in Warfare:   Use existing UN frameworks like the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) to discuss limits on autonomous cyber capabilities. This reflects similar international initiatives focused on regulating autonomous lethal weapon systems. The Opposition: Why a New Treaty Might Fail   Sceptics, including NATO-affiliated experts, argue that a Digital Geneva Convention is unnecessary—or even dangerous. Their concerns:   Existing Laws Suffice: IHL already covers cyber operations during war. New treaties risk redundancy or loopholes. Enforcement Is Impossible: Unlike missiles, cyber weapons are hard to trace. State Resistance: Major powers (e.g., U.S., China, Russia) won’t relinquish cyber advantages to unenforceable rules. Private Sector Dilemma: Companies like Google should be treated as combatants. Legal definitions are murky.   Instead, critics advocate strengthening state practice under current laws, as seen in the UN’s OEWG process on cyber norms. The Middle Ground: Evolving Norms, Not Revolution   While a full-blown treaty seems unlikely soon, gradual progress is possible:   Sector-Specific Agreements: Treaties protecting medical and energy systems could gain traction. Civilian Hacker Rules: The ICRC’s 8 Rules for Hacktivists (e.g., don’t target hospitals) offer a starting point. Public-Private Partnerships:  Tech giants and governments could collaborate on cyber defense, as seen in Ukraine. Conclusion: A Call for Coherence   The debate isn’t about whether cyber war needs rules—the question is whether we need new treaties or can retrofit existing ones. IHL offers a sturdy legal foundation, but the cyber-rooted ambiguities—attribution, civilian vs. military targets, scalable enforcement—call for creative, faster, and flexible mechanisms. Whether that emerges through binding treaties, hybrid frameworks, or voluntary accords, one thing is clear: in the digital age, warfare’s rules of engagement must evolve—or risk being outdated on the battlefield. While the Geneva Conventions provide a foundation, their analogue-era rules strain under digital warfare’s complexities. A Digital Geneva Convention remains a visionary but contentious solution, one hindered by geopolitics and enforcement hurdles. For now, the world must navigate a precarious balance: adapting old laws to new threats while avoiding a cyber "Wild West" where civilians pay the price. The stakes couldn’t be higher—because in cyberspace, the next attack could shut off a city’s lights, freeze its banks, or worse.   Citations/References Tworek, H. (2017, May 9). Microsoft is right: we need a digital Geneva convention. WIRED . https://www.wired.com/2017/05/microsoft-right-need-digital-geneva-convention/ Wikipedia contributors. (2024, July 13). International Committee of the Red Cross rules of engagement for civilian hackers . Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Committee_of_the_Red_Cross_rules_of_engagement_for_civilian_hackers Greenberg, A. (2023, September 7). The International Criminal Court will now prosecute cyberwar crimes. WIRED . https://www.wired.com/story/icc-cyberwar-crimes/ Cyberattacks as war crimes . (n.d.). https://www.ibanet.org/Cyberattacks-as-war-crimes Cyber Warfare: does International Humanitarian Law apply?  (2025, April 1). International Committee of the Red Cross. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/cyber-warfare-and-international-humanitarian-law Unhcr_Admin. (2017, August 2). What the Digital Geneva Convention means for the future of humanitarian action . UNHCR Innovation. https://www.unhcr.org/innovation/digital-geneva-convention-mean-future-humanitarian-action/ CCDCOE . (n.d.). https://ccdcoe.org/news/2017/geneva-conventions-apply-to-cyberspace-no-need-for-a-digital-geneva-convention/ Vasundhara, & Vasundhara. (2011, April 7). Cyber warfare – Do we need a new Geneva convention? Army Technology . https://www.army-technology.com/features/feature115500/ Image Citations       Gowda, N. (2023, April 16). International Law and Cyber Warfare. RostrumLegal . https://www.rostrumlegal.com/international-law-and-cyber-warfare/ Tb_Admin. (2025, January 21). Risks and consequences of neglecting cybersecurity . Terrabytegroup. https://www.terrabytegroup.com/risks-and-consequences-of-neglecting-cybersecurity-against-cyber-attacks/ (23) Securing Cyber Peace: Navigating Digital Warfare and International Law | LinkedIn . (2023, December 10). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/securing-cyber-peace-navigating-digital-warfare-law-hagen-sjolf/ Saini, K. (2025, June 19). Top cybersecurity applications and use cases . Simplilearn.com . https://www.simplilearn.com/cyber-security-applications-article Saxena, A. (2025, January 8). The near future of international law in cyberspace: Contentions and realities . orfonline.org . https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/the-near-future-of-international-law-in-cyberspace-contentions-and-realities

SWARNALI GHOSH | DATE: JUNE 25, 2025 Introduction: The Invisible Lifelines of the Digital Age Beneath the ocean’s surface, hidden from sight, lies the world’s most critical—and vulnerable—digital infrastructure: undersea internet cables. These fibre-optic veins carry over 95% of global internet traffic, connecting continents, powering financial markets, and enabling everything from video calls to military communications. In recent years, undersea cables have become a battleground in geopolitical conflicts, with nations like China and Russia accused of deliberate sabotage. Meanwhile, cybercriminals and state-sponsored hackers are continually finding new ways to exploit these cables, posing a threat to global connectivity. This article dives deep into the risks, real-world attacks, and the high-stakes race to secure the internet’s underwater backbone. Beneath the waves lies the literal backbone of our global digital world — nearly 1.4 million kilometres of undersea fibre-optic cables ferry virtually all internet traffic. Modern cloud services, military communications, financial markets, and our everyday social media run through these fragile cords, yet their vulnerabilities are often overlooked.   The Undersea Cable Network: How It Works   The Anatomy of a Submarine Cable: Modern undersea cables are marvels of engineering: Rugged Yet Slender Design: Despite being only 1–20 cm thick—like a garden hose—subsea cables are reinforced with layers of steel and polyethylene. This tough exterior protects them from crushing pressure, anchors, and even shark bites in the deep ocean. Blazing Fast Data Transmission:  At their core, ultra-thin optical fibres transmit internet data across the globe at staggering speeds reaching 200 terabits per second. That’s nearly 700,000 times faster than the original transatlantic cable laid in the 19th century. Signal Boosters Beneath the Waves:  To maintain data integrity across thousands of kilometers, repeaters are placed every 50–100 km along the cable. These devices amplify the light signals to prevent weakening or loss during transmission.   Who Owns and Controls Them? Big Tech's Grip on the Seafloor:   Private tech giants like Google, Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft now own or lease around 50% of all undersea cable capacity. Their control gives them unprecedented power over the global internet infrastructure and data flows . Telecom Alliances Shape the Future:   Most new cable projects are led by international telecom consortia, such as the 2Africa Cable, backed by Vodafone, China Mobile, and Meta. These partnerships pool resources to expand internet access while asserting influence over global connectivity. Rising Concerns Over China’s Cable Influence:   HMN Technologies, formerly Huawei Marine, holds about 11% of the subsea cable market. Western nations worry this could be a vector for surveillance and state-sponsored cyber operations. Critical dependency: Lifelines of the Global Internet:  Over 99% of the world’s internet traffic—spanning email, video calls, and data transfers—travels through undersea cables. They serve as the invisible backbone of our hyper-connected digital economy. Critical to Cloud, Finance, and Communication:  These cables enable cloud computing, real-time video conferencing, and seamless global financial transactions. A single disruption can affect everything from banking systems to emergency services and online businesses.   The Threats: From Accidents to Cyberwarfare   Physical Vulnerabilities: Anchor strikes & fishing nets: Cause 70–80% of cable cuts. In March 2024, West Africa lost internet for days after seismic activity and ship anchors severed four cables. Deep-sea sabotage:  Russian spy ships like the Yanta are suspected of mapping cables for future attacks. Choke points:  The Red Sea’s Bab al-Mandab Strait (17 cables) and the South China Sea are high-risk zones.   Cyberattacks: The New Frontier: Remote hijacking:  Cable management systems (like ROADMs) are internet-connected, making them hackable. Supply chain risks: Chinese repair ships (e.g., SBSS) could plant backdoors during maintenance. Data interception:  Unencrypted traffic passing through compromised cables can be tapped. State-Sponsored Sabotage: China vs. Taiwan:  In 2023–2025, Chinese ships repeatedly cut cables near Taiwan’s Matsu Islands, causing weeks-long outages. Baltic Sea incident:  A Chinese vessel, Yi Peng, allegedly severed cables linking Sweden and Estonia in 2024. Russia’s threats:  Dmitry Medvedev (ex-Russian president) hinted at targeting undersea cables as retaliation.   Physical Threats: Accidents and Sabotage   Fishing trawlers & anchors:  Roughly 70% of disruptions stem from maritime accidents—nets dragging across cable contours, poorly anchored ships, or dredging damage.   Natural disasters: Events like undersea earthquakes or volcanic eruptions (e.g., Tonga 2022) account for about 14% of the breaks.   Deliberate sabotage: Though less frequent, state-sponsored or espionage-driven actions occur, like Baltic Sea cuttings in late 2024 and the suspected involvement of the Chinese-flagged vessel Yi Peng. In the Baltic case, foreign ministers branded the incidents as “hybrid warfare”.   Cyber Intrusions: Remote Hacks and SDN Weaknesses   Cyber Risks in Cable Network Management: SDN and Remote Systems Expose New Attack Surfaces: Modern undersea cables use Software-Defined Networking (SDN) and internet-connected remote management tools for efficiency. However, these interfaces are prime targets for cyberattacks, as they can be accessed and manipulated remotely. State-Sponsored Exploits Threaten Data Sovereignty:   A cyber breach targeting a Pacific cable in April 2022 was stopped by U.S. authorities, highlighting real-world risks. There are growing concerns that hostile states could exploit SDN flaws to reroute sensitive traffic through surveillance-friendly channels.   Technical Espionage: Tapping and Surveillance: Landing-station access:  These coastal hubs are soft physical targets—hackers could plant devices to tap data before light exits the cable. Covert cable tapping:  Historical NSA programs like BLARNEY and FAIRVIEW, plus British GCHQ’s cable taps, confirm that undersea tapping isn't just theoretical .   Emerging Threats: UUVs and Deep-Sea Tools   Weaponized drones: Uncrewed undersea vehicles (UUVs) could carry explosives or cutting tools to sever cables at depth. Deep-sea cutting instruments:  Reports suggest China has developed specialized cutters capable of slicing through thick cables silently.   Geopolitical Ripple Effects   Economic fallout: Disruptions affect trillions of dollars daily, with even minor outages costing millions per day.   National security stakes: Cloud providers, military communications, diplomatic channels—all rely on cable integrity. A coordinated attack could isolate regions, shut down dependencies like Taiwan or India, and weaken critical infrastructure.   The Fallout: Economic and Security Consequences   Financial Disruptions: Real-World Losses from a Single Snip: When an undersea cable was severed near West Africa, Nigeria faced economic losses estimated at $590 million over just four days. The disruption crippled internet access, banking, and critical digital services across the region. Trillions Ride on Fragile Threads:  Every day, global banks transfer $3.9 trillion through these undersea networks. A coordinated cyber or physical attack could paralyze global financial markets within minutes.   Military and Political Risks: NATO’s Strategic Dependence:   NATO’s secure communications, intelligence sharing, and command systems rely heavily on undersea cables. If sabotaged during a conflict, it could severely impair military coordination and situational awareness. Taiwan’s Fragile Connectivity:   Taiwan is linked to the world by just 24 undersea cables, making it highly exposed to disruption. In a pre-invasion scenario, China could sever these links to isolate the island digitally and economically.   Protecting the Digital Lifelines: Solutions and Challenges   Redundancy and Resilience: Redundancy Through More Cables: Building more undersea cables boosts global internet resilience by reducing reliance on any single route. The 46,000 km-long 2Africa Cable will loop around the continent, offering broader access and backup paths. Satellites as Supplemental Support:   Satellite systems like SpaceX’s Starlink and Amazon’s Project Kuiper can provide emergency connectivity. However, they currently lack the high bandwidth and low latency needed to fully replace undersea cables.   Cybersecurity Measures: Encryption: A Missing Security Layer:   End-to-end encryption can shield undersea cable traffic from interception and surveillance.Despite the risks, a significant number of undersea cables still transmit data without encryption, exposing them to potential surveillance. FCC Steps Up Oversight:   The U.S. Federal Communications Commission now mandates that cable operators file cybersecurity risk assessments. They must also vet and audit third-party vendors—especially those with foreign ties—to bolster national security.   Geopolitical Strategies: U.S. Pushback Against Chinese Infrastructure:  The U.S. has blocked several undersea cable projects connecting to Hong Kong, citing national security risks. Officials fear these links could enable Chinese surveillance and data interception. NATO Defends the Digital Seafloor:  In response to rising threats, NATO has ramped up naval patrols near key undersea cable routes. It’s also increasing intelligence sharing on suspicious submarine activity, particularly from Russia.   Smart Cables for a Safer Seabed: Real-Time Anomaly Detection:  Modern undersea cables are embedded with distributed sensors that monitor for vibrations, pressure changes, and tampering. These sensors can instantly detect unusual activity, like a trawler dragging an anchor or a seismic event. Faster Fault Location and Repair:  When a fault occurs, smart sensors help pinpoint the exact location of the damage along thousands of kilometres. This precision drastically reduces repair times, restoring connectivity more quickly and efficiently.   Eyes in the Sky and on the Sea: Satellite Surveillance Enhances Awareness:   European systems like Galileo and Copernicus provide high-resolution satellite imagery and environmental data. They help track vessel movements and monitor undersea cable zones for potential threats or anomalies . Maritime Data Integration Boosts Security:   Integrating AIS ship tracking with maritime surveillance systems gives authorities live insights into vessel movements and potential threats. This layered monitoring helps detect suspicious activity near critical cable infrastructure.   Rapid Response to Undersea Threats: EU Invests in Repair Readiness:   The European Union plans to deploy specialized cable-repair ships, with a budget of around €400 million. These ships are designed to quickly address cable failures, reducing service interruptions and limiting financial damage. NATO and Navies Step Up Surveillance:   NATO's HEIST initiative focuses on improving the detection of hybrid threats by leveraging advanced, interconnected monitoring technologies. Meanwhile, national navies—like the UK Royal Navy—have intercepted suspicious activity near critical cables. Cybersecurity Fortifications for the Seafloor: Technical Safeguards for Infrastructure:   Best practices include securing remote cable management systems and applying Software-Defined Networking (SDN) hardening. End-to-end encryption of cable traffic is also essential to prevent data interception and tampering. Collaboration Through Threat Intelligence Sharing:   Establishing public-private threat-sharing hubs—such as Information Sharing and Analysis Centres (ISACs)—is vital. These centres enable faster detection, response, and coordination against cyber and physical threats to cable systems.   Legal Shields and Diplomatic Deterrence: Maritime Law as a Protective Framework: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) grants undersea cables special protections in international waters. The agreement’s clauses can be used to protect critical infrastructure and support responses to acts of disruption or tampering. Sanctions and Accountability Measures:   Governments are increasingly imposing sanctions for deliberate cable damage, including actions by covert “shadow fleets.” Legal frameworks are evolving to hold state and non-state actors accountable for sabotage or negligence.   Conclusion: The Silent War Under the Sea   Undersea cables represent a critical vulnerability in today’s cloud-driven world. With the rise of cyber conflict, their protection goes far beyond simple maintenance—it’s a matter of global stability. From the digital isolation risks facing Taiwan to reports of Russian submarines near cable routes, the urgency is real. These cables are the physical infrastructure that powers the cloud, stretching across the seabed in a complex web that’s as much a geopolitical concern as a technological achievement. While accidental damage already disrupts millions, deliberate sabotage or cyber interference could seriously jeopardize global communications, economic systems, and national security.   Citations/References Ratiu, A. (2025, January 16). Cyber defence across the ocean floor: The geopolitics of submarine cable security - Atlantic Council . Atlantic Council. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/report/cyber-defense-across-the-ocean-floor-the-geopolitics-of-submarine-cable-security/ How hackers of submarine cables may be held liable under the Law of the Sea | Chicago Journal of International Law. (n.d.). https://cjil.uchicago.edu/print-archive/how-hackers-submarine-cables-may-be-held-liable-under-law-sea Coker, J. (2025, June 24). Submarine cables are at growing risk of cyberattacks. Infosecurity Magazine . https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/submarine-cables-risk-cyber-attacks/ Runde, D. F., Murphy, E. L., & Bryja, T. (2024). Safeguarding Subsea Cables: Protecting Cyber Infrastructure amid Great Power Competition . https://www.csis.org/analysis/safeguarding-subsea-cables-protecting-cyber-infrastructure-amid-great-power-competition Information Warfare in the Depths: An Analysis of Global Undersea cable Networks | Proceedings - May 2023 Vol. 149/5/1,443 . (2023, May 31). U.S. Naval Institute. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2023/may/information-warfare-depths-analysis-global-undersea-cable-networks Goud, N. (2024, December 18). UNSEEN Guardians: How submarine internet cables in deep seas thwart cyber attacks . Cybersecurity Insiders. https://www.cybersecurity-insiders.com/unseen-guardians-how-submarine-internet-cables-in-deep-seas-thwart-cyber-attacks/ Discovery, B. (n.d.). Subsea Secrets: spies, sabotage, and the global race for internet cables . Boundless Discovery. https://newsletter.boundlessdiscovery.com/p/subsea-secrets-spies-sabotage-and-the-global-race-for-internet-cables Image Citations Burgess, M. (2022, November 2). The most vulnerable place on the internet. WIRED . https://www.wired.com/story/submarine-internet-cables-egypt/ Austin. (2024, October 16). Safeguarding connectivity: The role of submarine cables and Deep-Sea emergency Services - global brands. Global Brands Magazine . https://www.globalbrandsmagazine.com/submarine-cables-deep-sea-emergency-services/ Staff, O. (2024, November 19). Undersea internet cable connecting Germany and Finland destroyed beneath the Baltic Sea, sabotage feared. OpIndia . https://www.opindia.com/2024/11/undersea-data-cable-germany-and-finland-destroyed-beneath-the-baltic-sea-sabotage-feared/ Conversation, & Conversation. (2024, April 2). Nearly all data that moves around the world goes through these undersea cables . Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/91072728/internet-undersea-cables-data Marlow, J. (2022, July 26). Undersea internet cables can detect earthquakes—and may soon warn of tsunamis. The New Yorker . https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/undersea-internet-cables-can-detect-earthquakes-and-may-soon-warn-of-tsunamis

ARPITA (BISWAS) MAJUMDER | DATE: DECEMBER 19, 2024 In an era marked by a surge in cyber threats, businesses can no longer rely solely on traditional perimeter-based security models. The shift towards cloud computing, the growing trend of remote work, and the evolving sophistication of cyberattacks have exposed vulnerabilities in legacy security systems. Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) is a contemporary security model that has become essential for organisations seeking to safeguard their digital resources. Zero Trust departs from traditional security approaches, which presume that internal users and devices are inherently trustworthy, by emphasising the core concept of "never trust, always verify." This article explores why Zero Trust Architecture is crucial for modern enterprises, examines its functionality, and highlights the key advantages it offers.   What is Zero Trust Architecture?   At its core, Zero Trust Architecture is a cybersecurity model that assumes no user or device—whether inside or outside the corporate network—is inherently trustworthy. Unlike traditional approaches that secure the network perimeter and assume everything within it is safe, Zero Trust operates on the principle that every access request, regardless of origin, must be authenticated, authorised, and continuously verified. By scrutinising every user, device, and application, Zero Trust helps prevent unauthorised access, lateral movement within the network, and data breaches.   The Zero Trust model is a response to the increasing complexity of modern IT environments. In a world where users and devices are constantly on the move—whether in cloud-based environments, remote work setups, or interconnected IoT networks—traditional perimeter-based security models are no longer sufficient. Instead, Zero Trust offers a more holistic, granular approach to security, ensuring that the organisation’s digital resources are safeguarded at all times.   The Increasing Importance of Zero Trust in Modern Cybersecurity Strategies The digital transformation of businesses, combined with the rise of remote work, cloud computing, and bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policies, has made traditional security models inadequate. A large portion of business data is now stored in cloud environments, making it increasingly difficult to maintain a solid perimeter. Furthermore, the rise of sophisticated cyberattacks—such as phishing, ransomware, and advanced persistent threats (APTs)—has exposed the weaknesses in older security frameworks.   For instance, in 2020, the SolarWinds cyberattack highlighted the vulnerabilities of organisations that rely on perimeter security models. Attackers were able to breach the network by exploiting a trusted software update, gaining access to sensitive data and systems across multiple organisations. The attack was a wake-up call for many businesses, demonstrating that relying on perimeter defences is no longer sufficient in today’s complex threat landscape. This is where Zero Trust Architecture comes into play.   Zero Trust operates on the premise that every access request to the network could pose a potential threat. By applying this mindset, businesses can limit the attack surface and reduce the likelihood of successful attacks. Rather than focusing on securing a perimeter, Zero Trust limits the risk of lateral movement by continuously verifying identities and enforcing strict access controls across all users and devices.   Key Principles of Zero Trust Architecture   Zero Trust is not a single technology, but a comprehensive security framework with several guiding principles that help protect businesses against emerging threats. These principles work together to ensure that the organisation’s resources are accessible only to those who are authorised and continuously monitored. Here are some of the fundamental principles that make Zero Trust so effective: Least Privilege Access: The concept of least privilege is central to Zero Trust. This principle dictates that users, devices, and applications should be granted only the minimum level of access required to perform their specific tasks. By limiting the scope of access, businesses reduce the risk of a breach caused by compromised credentials or malicious insiders. For example, an employee working in marketing should not have access to the company’s financial systems. By enforcing strict access controls based on job roles, organisations can ensure that sensitive data is only available to those who truly need it.   Micro-Segmentation: Micro-segmentation involves breaking the network into smaller, distinct segments, each governed by its own set of security policies. This approach makes it significantly harder for attackers to move laterally within the network. Even if an attacker gains access to one segment, they are prevented from accessing other parts of the network without proper authorisation. For instance, a healthcare organisation might isolate its patient records from its email system, ensuring that even if an attacker compromises an employee’s email account, they cannot easily access sensitive patient data.   Continuous Authentication and Monitoring: One of the key differentiators of Zero Trust is its emphasis on continuous verification. Traditional security models may authenticate a user once at login, but Zero Trust requires ongoing validation of both users and devices throughout their session. This continuous authentication is achieved through multi-factor authentication (MFA), biometric verification, and behavioural analytics.   By continuously monitoring network traffic and user behaviour, organisations can detect anomalies in real-time. If an employee who typically works from the office suddenly starts accessing resources from an unusual location, the system can flag this as suspicious and require additional verification.   Strong Data Protection: Zero Trust prioritises data protection by implementing encryption, both at rest and in transit, to safeguard sensitive information from unauthorised access. This means that even if data is intercepted by a malicious actor, it remains unreadable without the proper decryption keys. Additionally, data access is strictly controlled, with policies ensuring that only authorised users can view or modify sensitive information. For example, a financial institution may use Zero Trust to enforce strict encryption protocols on all customer transaction data, ensuring that even if an attacker breaches the network, the data remains protected.   User and Entity Behaviour Analytics (UEBA): Zero Trust leverages machine learning and artificial intelligence to analyse user and entity behaviours, identifying patterns that may indicate a security threat. If a user’s behaviour deviates from the norm—such as downloading an unusually large volume of data or accessing systems they don’t typically use—the system can trigger an alert and initiate a response, such as requiring additional authentication or blocking access entirely.   Why Zero Trust is Essential for Modern Businesses   Enhanced Security Posture:  By eliminating implicit trust, ZTA significantly reduces the risk of unauthorised access and data breaches. This proactive stance is crucial in defending against advanced persistent threats and insider attacks.   Adaptability to Modern Work Environments:  With the rise of remote work, cloud computing, and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies, traditional perimeter-based security models are inadequate. ZTA's flexible framework accommodates these modern work dynamics, ensuring secure access regardless of location or device.   Regulatory Compliance:  Numerous industries must adhere to strict regulations regarding data privacy and protection. Implementing ZTA can assist organizations in meeting these compliance standards by providing robust access controls and detailed audit trails.   Operational Efficiency:  By automating access controls and continuously monitoring user activities, ZTA reduces the administrative burden on IT teams. This efficiency allows for quicker response times to potential threats and frees up resources for other critical tasks.   Protection Against Insider Threats:  Not all threats come from external sources. ZTA's rigorous validation processes help detect and mitigate risks posed by malicious or compromised insiders, who might otherwise exploit trusted access. The Benefits of Zero Trust Architecture   Organisations that adopt Zero Trust Architecture stand to gain several significant benefits. These advantages go beyond just improved security—they also enhance operational efficiency, ensure regulatory compliance, and support modern business models.   Enhanced Security Posture: Zero Trust minimises the risk of data breaches and unauthorised access by consistently validating identities, implementing robust access controls, and segmenting the network. This proactive approach ensures that attackers are prevented from gaining a foothold in the network, even if they manage to compromise a device or user account. Simplified Compliance: Zero Trust makes it easier for businesses to comply with data protection regulations such as GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA. By providing robust data protection, continuous monitoring, and audit trails, Zero Trust ensures that organisations can demonstrate compliance during audits and mitigate the risks associated with non-compliance.   Support for Remote Work and Cloud Adoption: As remote work becomes the norm and businesses increasingly rely on cloud-based services, Zero Trust provides a scalable and flexible security model. Unlike traditional perimeter-based security, which struggles to secure cloud environments, Zero Trust ensures that users can access critical applications and data from any location, while still maintaining a high level of security.   Reduced Attack Surface: By applying the principle of least privilege and segmenting the network, Zero Trust limits the number of entry points available to attackers. This reduces the overall attack surface, making it much harder for malicious actors to exploit vulnerabilities and move laterally through the network.   Challenges in Implementing Zero Trust   While the benefits of ZTA are clear, organizations may encounter several challenges during implementation:   Complexity of Integration:  Transitioning from traditional security models to ZTA requires significant changes to existing infrastructure and processes, which can be complex and resource-intensive. Cultural Resistance:  Employees accustomed to less stringent security measures may resist the increased scrutiny and access restrictions imposed by ZTA.   Continuous Management:  Maintaining a Zero Trust environment demands ongoing monitoring, updates, and adjustments to access controls, necessitating dedicated resources and expertise.   Real-Life Examples of Zero Trust Architecture in Action   Several leading companies and government agencies have already implemented Zero Trust Architecture to enhance their cybersecurity posture:   Google:  The BeyondCorp initiative by Google serves as a leading example of the Zero Trust model in practice. The company’s approach to Zero Trust allows employees to securely access corporate resources from any device, regardless of location, by continuously verifying user identity and device health.   Microsoft:  Microsoft has adopted Zero Trust across its Azure cloud platform, ensuring that access to its cloud resources is strictly controlled and continuously monitored. The company has implemented multi-factor authentication, device health checks, and behavioural analytics to enhance security.   U.S. Federal Government:  The U.S. government has mandated the adoption of Zero Trust Architecture across all federal agencies as part of its cybersecurity modernisation efforts. This initiative aims to protect sensitive government data from increasingly sophisticated cyber threats.   Conclusion   As cyber threats become more sophisticated and widespread, traditional security models are proving inadequate. Zero Trust Architecture provides a comprehensive, proactive approach to cybersecurity that minimises risk, protects sensitive data, and ensures compliance with regulations. By continuously verifying identities, enforcing least privilege access, and segmenting networks, Zero Trust offers businesses the flexibility and security they need in an increasingly digital and interconnected world. For modern businesses, adopting Zero Trust is not just an option—it is an essential step in safeguarding their future. Citations/References Macy, D. (2024, July 5). Understanding Zero Trust Security: Why It’s Essential for Modern Enterprises. Security Forward. https://www.securityforward.com/understanding-zero-trust-security-why-its-essential-for-modern-enterprises/ SPHERE. (2024, June 5). Zero Trust Architectures: Why they are essential for modern Enterprises. https://sphereco.com/blog/zero-trust-architectures-in-modern-enterprises/ Zero Trust Architecture: Why businesses need it now more than ever. (2024, September 19). NetGain Technologies. https://www.netgainit.com/blogs/businesses-need-zero-trust-architecture/ Tb_Admin. (2024, December 16). Zero Trust Architecture: Why ‘Never Trust, Always verify’ is the future. Terrabytegroup. https://www.terrabytegroup.com/zero-trust-architecture-why-never-trust-always-verify-is-the-future/ (26) Why Zero-Trust Architecture is Crucial for Modern Enterprises | LinkedIn. (2024, June 14). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-zero-trust-architecture-crucial-modern-kelly-hammons-byufc/ (26) Zero Trust Architecture: Why it’s becoming essential for modern enterprises | LinkedIn. (2024, August 15). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zero-trust-architecture-why-its-becoming-essential-modern-joel-mutiso-cp4af/ Tyagi, S. (2024, November 4). 10 reasons why enterprises need zero trust security - ColorTokens. ColorTokens. https://colortokens.com/blogs/why-enterprises-need-zero-trust-security/ Image Citations (26) Zero Trust Architectures: Why they are essential for modern enterprises | LinkedIn. (2024, June 6). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zero-trust-architectures-why-essential-modern-rew0e/ Crawford, C., & Crawford, C. (2024, June 23). The growing importance of zero-trust architecture in cybersecurity for businesses. The Saturn Partners -. https://saturnpartners.com/2024/03/the-growing-importance-of-zero-trust-architecture-in-cybersecurity-for-businesses/ Contributor, S. (2022, May 4). 5 Core principles of the zero trust model of cybersecurity. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/splunk/2022/05/01/5-core-principles-of-the-zero-trust-model-of-cybersecurity/ Haroon, & Intelliswift. (n.d.). Why Zero Trust Architecture matters now | intelliswift. Intelliswift Software. https://www.intelliswift.com/insights/blogs/importance-of-zero-trust-architecture Convergence, I. (2024, September 10). 5 Advantages of zero trust architecture in enterprise Security. IT Convergence. https://www.itconvergence.com/blog/5-advantages-of-zero-trust-architecture-in-enterprise-security/ Zero Trust Model: principles, challenges, and a real-life example. (2024, September 25). Perception Point. https://perception-point.io/guides/zero-trust/zero-trust-model-principles-challenges-and-a-real-life-example/ About the Author Arpita (Biswas) Majumder is a key member of the CEO's Office at QBA USA, the parent company of AmeriSOURCE, where she also contributes to the digital marketing team. With a master’s degree in environmental science, she brings valuable insights into a wide range of cutting-edge technological areas and enjoys writing blog posts and whitepapers. Recognised for her tireless commitment, Arpita consistently delivers exceptional support to the CEO and to team members.

SHILPI MONDAL| DATE: DECEMBER 19,2024 In the evolving digital landscape, the deprecation of third-party cookies has ushered in a new era for online privacy and data management. This shift compels both consumers and businesses to reassess their approaches to digital privacy, data collection, and user tracking. The Role of Third-Party Cookies Third-party cookies have long been instrumental in tracking user behavior across websites, enabling targeted advertising and personalized user experiences. These cookies, placed by domains other than the one a user visits, collect data on browsing habits, preferences, and interactions. However, growing concerns over privacy violations and unauthorized data sharing have led to increased scrutiny and regulatory actions against their use. Recent Developments Initially, major browsers like Safari and Firefox implemented measures to block third-party cookies by default. Google Chrome, commanding a significant market share, had announced plans to phase out third-party cookies by the second half of 2024. However, in a recent turn of events, Google has decided to retain third-party cookies, opting instead to present users with prompts to decide on their usage. This decision has sparked discussions about its implications for user privacy and the digital advertising ecosystem. Impact on Digital Advertising The deprecation of third-party cookies poses significant challenges for digital advertisers: Targeting and Personalization :   Without third-party cookies, delivering personalized content and targeted ads becomes more complex. Advertisers may struggle to reach specific audiences effectively. Performance Measurement: Analytics and attribution models that rely on third-party cookies face reduced effectiveness. Metrics like Return on Ad Spend (ROAS) may become less accurate, complicating campaign assessments. Programmatic Advertising:   The ability to programmatically retarget users diminishes, potentially leading to decreased Cost Per Thousand (CPM) rates and reduced revenue for online publishers. Alternatives to Third-Party Cookies In response to these challenges, several alternatives have emerged: First-Party Data: Collecting data directly from users with their consent allows for more precise targeting and personalization. Universal IDs:   Solutions like The Trade Desk’s Unified ID 2.0 offer the ability to maintain a comprehensive consumer view across channels and platforms, enhancing personalization even in cookie less environments. Contextual Targeting:   Aligning ads with relevant content ensures delivery based on context rather than individual identifiers, respecting user privacy while maintaining effectiveness. Data Clean Rooms:   These secure environments allow companies to match their data without sharing personally identifiable information, facilitating collaboration while maintaining privacy. Google’s Privacy Sandbox:   An initiative aimed at developing new standards for web privacy, providing alternatives to third-party cookies for ad targeting and measurement.   Considerations for the Future While these alternatives offer promising solutions, each comes with its own set of challenges and limitations. The digital advertising industry must adapt to these changes by: Investing in First-Party Data Strategies: Building direct relationships with consumers to gather consented data. Exploring New Technologies:   Adopting emerging solutions like universal IDs and data clean rooms. Emphasizing Privacy Compliance:   Ensuring all data collection and usage practices adhere to evolving privacy regulations. The landscape of digital advertising is undergoing a significant transformation. Staying informed and agile will be crucial for businesses to navigate the post-third-party cookie era successfully. Transition to a Post-Cookie World Major web browsers, including Google Chrome, have announced plans to phase out third-party cookies. Google, for instance, has been developing its Privacy Sandbox initiative, which aims to create web standards that enhance privacy while still supporting advertising needs. This initiative includes proposals like the Topics API, designed to enable interest-based advertising without revealing individual user identities. Emerging Alternatives and Strategies In response to the decline of third-party cookies, several alternative tracking methods and strategies have emerged: First-Party Data Collection: Businesses are increasingly relying on data collected directly from their audiences through interactions on their own platforms. This approach fosters trust and ensures compliance with privacy regulations. Contextual Targeting:   This method involves displaying advertisements based on the content of a webpage rather than user behavior, aligning ads with relevant topics without the need for personal data. Universal IDs and Device Graphs:   These solutions aim to create consistent user identifiers across different platforms and devices, often utilizing anonymized data to maintain privacy. Data Clean Rooms: Secure environments where companies can collaborate and analyze user data without directly sharing personal information, ensuring data privacy while gaining valuable insights. Implications for Digital Privacy The move away from third-party cookies signifies a broader commitment to enhancing user privacy online. Users are gaining more control over their data, with increased transparency regarding how information is collected and utilized. For businesses, this transition necessitates the adoption of privacy-centric approaches, ensuring compliance with regulations and maintaining consumer trust. Conclusion Navigating the post-cookie world requires a balanced approach that respects user privacy while enabling effective digital marketing strategies. By embracing new technologies and methodologies, stakeholders can contribute to a more secure and transparent digital ecosystem. Citation: Graham, M. (2024, July 24). What marketers should know about Google’s ‘Surprising, but not shocking’ cookies About-Face. WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-marketers-should-know-about-googles-surprising-but-not-shocking-cookies-about-face-c6cc3dde Experian Marketing Services. (2024, November 19). Understanding cookie deprecation and its impact on advertising. Marketing Forward Blog. https://www.experian.com/blogs/marketing-forward/cookie-deprecation/ The future of third-party cookies, discussing the deprecation. (n.d.). https://www.epsilon.com/us/insights/third-party-cookies Davis, K. (2024, January 17). Alternatives to third-party cookies: The state of play. Mar Tech. https://martech.org/alternatives-to-third-party-cookies-the-state-of-play/ Bojic, A. (2024, October 21). The post-cookie world: 7 tracking alternatives you should consider - Things Solver. Things Solver. https://thingsolver.com/blog/7-tracking-alternatives/   Image Citation: Tyagi, G. (2025, September 16). The Cookieless Future: How to thrive in the life after cookies?  Silverpush. https://www.silverpush.co/blogs/the-cookieless-future-how-to-thrive-in-the-life-after-cookies/ Shreya. (2024, July 24). Third-Party cookies: What are they and how do they work? CookieYes. https://www.cookieyes.com/blog/third-party-cookies/

MINAKSHI DEBNATH | DATE: APRIL 25,2025 Biometric authentication—leveraging unique physiological traits like fingerprints, facial features, and iris patterns—has become integral to modern security systems. While offering enhanced convenience and security over traditional passwords, these systems are not impervious to exploitation. Cybercriminals have developed sophisticated methods to bypass biometric security, posing significant threats to personal and organizational data.​ How Cybercriminals Bypass Biometric Security Fingerprint Spoofing Attackers can replicate fingerprints using materials such as gelatin, silicone, or latex. By lifting latent fingerprints from surfaces, they create molds that can deceive fingerprint scanners. Advanced techniques involve 3D printing fingerprints based on high-resolution images, producing replicas that mimic the properties of human skin.   Facial Recognition Spoofing Facial recognition systems can be tricked using various methods:​ Print Attacks: Presenting high-resolution photographs to the scanner. ​ Replay Attacks: Displaying pre-recorded videos of the target's face.​ 3D Mask Attacks: Using crafted masks resembling the target's face.   Deepfake Attacks: Employing AI-generated videos that mimic facial expressions and movements, making detection challenging. ​ Iris Recognition Spoofing Iris scanners can be deceived through:​Digital Iris Images: Displaying high-resolution images or videos of the target's eye.​ Artificial Eyes or Contact Lenses: Creating replicas or contact lenses with the target's iris pattern. Physical Eyes: In extreme cases, using actual eyes to bypass scanners. Biometric Data Theft If biometric data is not securely stored, hackers can steal this information and use it for unauthorized access or identity theft. Unlike passwords, biometric traits cannot be changed once compromised, making breaches particularly concerning. ​ Countermeasures Against Biometric Spoofing To mitigate the risks associated with biometric spoofing, several strategies can be employed: Liveness Detection Implementing liveness detection techniques ensures that the biometric input is from a live person. This can involve prompting users to perform specific actions, such as blinking or smiling, or analyzing physiological signs like pulse and skin texture.   Multimodal Biometrics Combining multiple biometric modalities—such as fingerprint and facial recognition—enhances security. An attacker would need to spoof multiple traits simultaneously, significantly increasing the difficulty of unauthorized access.  ​ Biometric Encryption Encrypting biometric data during storage and transmission adds an extra layer of protection. Even if data is intercepted, encryption prevents unauthorized parties from interpreting or misusing the information . Continuous Monitoring Regularly monitoring biometric systems for anomalies can help detect and respond to spoofing attempts promptly. Anomaly detection mechanisms can alert administrators to unusual activities, enabling swift action. User Education Educating users about the risks of biometric spoofing and promoting best practices—such as not sharing biometric data and being cautious with unfamiliar apps—can reduce the likelihood of data compromise. ​ Conclusion While biometric authentication offers significant advantages in security and user convenience, it is not without vulnerabilities. Cybercriminals continue to develop advanced methods to bypass these systems, emphasizing the need for robust countermeasures. By implementing techniques like liveness detection, multimodal biometrics, and biometric encryption, and by promoting user awareness, organizations and individuals can enhance the resilience of biometric systems against spoofing attacks.​   Citation/References: MacDonald, R. (2024, February 15). Combatting Biometric spoofing - Security Boulevard. Security Boulevard. https://securityboulevard.com/2024/02/combatting-biometric-spoofing/?utm K, S. (2024, December 11). What is Biometric Spoofing and How To Prevent It?  Facia.ai . https://facia.ai/blog/what-is-biometric-spoofing-and-how-to-prevent-it/ UMATechnology. (2025, January 10). Biometric Security Threats and Countermeasure - UMA Technology. UMA Technology. https://umatechnology.org/biometric-security-threats-and-countermeasure/?utm_source=chatgpt.com#google_vignette Heal, Q., & Heal, Q. (2025, March 4). Biometric authentication under attack: How to protect data. Home - Latest Computer Security News, Tips, and Advice. https://www.quickheal.co.in/knowledge-centre/biometric-authentication-protection-fingerprints-face-id/ FaceOnLive. (2024, June 15). Anti-Spoofing Techniques in Biometric Authentication - FaceOnLive : On-Premises ID Verification & Biometrics Solution Provider. FaceOnLive : On-Premises ID Verification & Biometrics Solution Provider. https://faceonlive.com/anti-spoofing-techniques-in-biometric-authentication/ Secure Network Solutions India Private Limited. (n.d.). Page not found - Secure Network Solutions India Private Limited. https://www.snsin.com/strengthening-biometric-security-tackling-the-threat-of-biometric-spoofing/ Centexitguy, & Centexitguy. (2023, July 28). Biometric spoofing: Understanding the threat to biometric security | The Central Texas IT guy. The Central Texas IT Guy | Web Development Austin, SEO Austin, Austin Search Engine Marketing, Internet Marketing Austin, Web Design Austin, Roundrock Web Design, IT Support Central Texas, Social Media Central Texas. https://thecentexitguy.com/biometric-spoofing-understanding-the-threat-to-biometric-security/ Biostatistics.Io . (2025, March 12). Challenges in Biometric Security: Addressing spoofing and attacks - Biostatistics. https://biostatistics.io/qa/challenges-in-biometric-security-addressing-spoofing-and-attacks/ Heal, Q., & Heal, Q. (2025, March 4). Biometric authentication under attack: How to protect data. Home - Latest Computer Security News, Tips, and Advice. https://www.quickheal.co.in/knowledge-centre/biometric-authentication-protection-fingerprints-face-id/ FaceOnLive. (2024, June 15). Anti-Spoofing Techniques in Biometric Authentication - FaceOnLive : On-Premises ID Verification & Biometrics Solution Provider. FaceOnLive : On-Premises ID Verification & Biometrics Solution Provider. https://faceonlive.com/anti-spoofing-techniques-in-biometric-authentication/ Image Citations: Kensington. (2023, September 15). Understanding biometrics and security keys benefits limitations and use cases. Kensington. https://www.kensington.com/news/security-blog/understanding-biometrics-and-security-keys-benefits-limitations-and-use-cases/ Nash, J. (2021, April 1). Hackers spoofed biometric authentication videos to steal millions in China. Biometric Update | Biometrics News, Companies and Explainers. https://www.biometricupdate.com/202103/hackers-spoofed-biometric-authentication-videos-to-steal-millions-in-china Using synthetic data to fight fingerprint spoofing. (2025, April 25). Fime Group. https://www.fime.com/ko_KP/blog/beulrogeu-15/post/using-synthetic-data-to-fight-fingerprint-spoofing-434