THREAT INTEL: The Paradox of Share and Defend – Reactive Measures in a Proactive World

Take the partners Jisc and BT Group, both are completely exposed to cybercrime due to exposed and insecure Internet Assets and DNS. This surely raises pressing questions about the program’s efficacy as both contribute substantially to the UK’s security exposure.

Jisc, responsible for technology and connectivity in educational institutions, and BT Group, managing phone lines for the majority of UK households, inadvertently by default, expose every child and household (unknowingly) to significant cyber risks.

Their demonstrable vulnerabilities in managing their own Internet Assets and DNS undermine the very essence of what ‘Share and Defend’ aims to achieve.

This paradox is troubling. How can a program be expected to secure national cyber infrastructure when its foundational partners struggle with basic security principles?

This situation casts doubt on whether ‘Share and Defend’ can be more than a reactive platform. Instead of preemptively fortifying defenses, it risks merely responding to breaches and partial information after the damage is done.

In a landscape where proactive defense is paramount, relying on entities with a track record of security lapses to lead the charge is a perilous strategy. The NCSC and UK Government would be wise to reevaluate their approach, ensuring that the partners are not only contributors but exemplars of robust cybersecurity practices.

Only then can we hope that ‘Share and Defend’ transforms from a reactive measure into a proactive bulwark against cyber threats.

FBI Cyber Division | Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) | The White House | National Cybersecurity Coordination Center (NCSCC)