The myth of government as a cyber shield

No government, whether in Washington, London, or Brussels, can be considered a cyber security saviour. Organisations with robust internal defenses should be minimally impacted by events like the US shutdown or proposed significant cuts to civilian cyber programmes.

The issue of overreliance on government support is not unique to the US; it should be a global concern. Governments around the world, from the UK to the EU, face financial and operational constraints that can delay their ability to provide timely and adequate cyber support. Remarkably, when the Solorigate/Sunburst incident occurred at SolarWinds in 2020, the American government itself was a victim due to weak internal controls, not a lack of federal alerts.

The real threat is the mistaken belief that resolving vulnerabilities published by government sources alone will ensure safety from attacks. Cyber security must be viewed as an organisational responsibility, not a public service.

Government limitations in cyber defence

Governments can help standardise threat intelligence and regulate basic cyber security controls, but the notion that they form the backbone of global cyber security is a misconception. The US shutdown reflects challenges faced internationally. For example, in 2017, the UK’s NHS suffered a major ransomware attack due to outdated security practices and slow patching, not because of government inaction.

During the 2018-2019 US shutdown, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) operated with only 10% of its staff, yet breaches did not increase as a direct result. This is because the process of patching vulnerabilities is typically slow and lags behind updates from government threat feeds, which can overwhelm security teams.

Additionally, vulnerability scoring often lacks sufficient context, leading to misrepresentation of the true threat landscape. Relying solely on governmental threat feeds is insufficient, much like waiting for a weather report only after you are already affected.

Building an adaptive, self-reliant defence

The primary reason that even well-resourced organisations continue to experience breaches is not a lack of government support, but rather weak identity security controls and limited visibility into identity credentials. Nearly 80% of all web-based attacks stem from identity compromise, and 59% of breaches can be attributed to identity-driven threats, highlighting how the issue is often higher than reported.

While unpatched vulnerabilities can provide entry points for attackers, the underlying issue is frequently a weak identity security platform that allows credentials to remain unchecked and move freely within an organisation. This recurring pattern is evident in many security breaches. To counteract this, organisations must reinforce their defences by focusing on zero-trust identity frameworks, supply-chain fortification, and proactive threat monitoring.

Zero-trust: More than a buzzword

Zero-trust identity security is not merely a trendy concept; it represents a fundamental shift in mindset. Every user should be considered a potential threat, necessitating risk-based, adaptive identity security controls to prevent compromise.

Strengthening identity security includes auditing identity providers and accounts, removing blind spots, enforcing least-privilege access, implementing adaptive access controls, and integrating real-time behavioral analytics.

As government services lag, adaptive zero-trust identity security becomes the critical firewall against chaos, and with AI-driven attacks expected to rise by 40% by 2027, vigilance and self-reliance are increasingly vital.

For instance, one healthcare organisation used predictive analytics to thwart a ransomware attack before it could spread, demonstrating the importance of combining robust internal monitoring with external intelligence for proactive threat defense.

A new era of cyber independence

The Trump administration’s budget suggests a shift away from civilian cyber programmes, prompting the private sector to innovate and fill the gaps. This trend is likely to continue globally as governments face budgetary pressures. For cyber security professionals and organisations, this transition should be viewed as an opportunity rather than a setback.

Private firms, ISACs, and open-source intelligence sources can offer robust alternatives to government-provided options. The shutdown reveals a fundamental truth: cyber security is the responsibility of organisations themselves, not the government.

Take control today

Organisations must not allow government shutdowns or policy changes to dictate the strength of their cyber security. If government disruptions cause concern, that fear is misplaced.

Instead, focus should be placed on building a resilient security ecosystem. Investing in zero-trust security by implementing adaptive and comprehensive identity security platforms is essential.

Organisations should also strengthen supply chain security and third-party diligence through regular audits and ensure continuous monitoring of threat exposure both internally and externally. Expanding internal monitoring and integrating threat intelligence from multiple sources will further enhance security posture.

Ultimately, effective organisational cyber security is not about surviving a government shutdown, but about continuously outsmarting and outmaneuvering adversaries who never rest. By acting now, organisations can turn government pauses into strategic advantages, achieving greater self-reliance and adaptability in cyber defense.

John Paul Cunningham is chief information security officer (CISO) at Silverfort, an identity security specialist.