Government data has been stolen in a cyberattack, though officials say the risk to individuals remains low, according to a UK minister. The incident has prompted an ongoing investigation and renewed warnings from cybersecurity experts about the long-term risks of state-linked digital espionage.

Trade Minister Chris Bryant confirmed the breach in an interview with BBC Breakfast, saying officials moved quickly once the issue was identified. “An investigation is ongoing,” Bryant said, adding that the security gap was “closed pretty quickly.” While a Chinese affiliated group is suspected, Bryant cautioned that investigators “simply don’t know as yet” who was responsible.

The compromised systems are understood to relate to visa-related data. Government officials have emphasized that there is no indication of immediate harm to individuals, but cybersecurity specialists say such incidents should not be minimized, particularly when a nation-state actor may be involved.

Anna Collard, security awareness advocate at KnowBe4, warned that the implications often extend far beyond the initial breach. “While the government has described the risk to individuals as ‘low’, incidents like this still matter,” she said. “When state-level actors are suspected, the objective is often long-term intelligence rather than immediate harm. That makes transparency, strong oversight, and timely communication critical. Attribution in cyber incidents is complex, but this is another reminder that government systems are high-value targets. And even with attribution aside, what matters is public trust. Citizens expect their data to be handled with the highest level of care, especially when it involves sensitive information like visas.”

Chris Hauk, consumer privacy advocate at Pixel Privacy, said government data breaches often reveal underlying security weaknesses. “Government data breaches are always concerning, even when the government assures us that the possibility of risks to individuals is low,” he said. “Such a breach indicates that either the government systems were not properly configured or kept updated, or similar issues exist in third party systems. Even if individuals’ data has not been immediately exposed, compromises of government systems can lead to additional intelligence gathering or targeted attacks against public servants and citizens.” Hauk added that this incident fits a broader pattern of suspected Chinese-linked cyber operations that are likely to continue.

Nathan Webb, principal consultant at Acumen Cyber, noted that even incomplete identity data can be highly valuable. “Even partial identity data can be correlated across other breaches and used to create more convincing targeted attempts against individuals,” he said. Webb explained that determining the true impact of a breach is difficult because attackers may already hold related data from other sources. He added that if Chinese nation-state actors are involved, the attack was likely targeted and sophisticated, making strong patching strategies and continuous vulnerability scanning essential.

Other experts highlighted the strategic nature of such intrusions. Dray Agha, senior manager of security operations at Huntress, said, “This intrusion is likely an espionage operation aimed at building intelligence profiles, understanding policy deliberations, or mapping government networks. The real risk isn’t immediate financial harm to citizens, but rather long-term erosion of national security and diplomacy. This incident should be a stark reminder that state-affiliated cyber operations are primarily about persistent, strategic intelligence gathering, not just immediate, disruptive attacks.”

Dan Panesar, chief revenue officer at Certes, emphasized that speed alone does not define success in responding to breaches. “When a suspected nation-state actor steals government data, the risk is not defined by how quickly a gap was closed, but by what data was accessible during that window,” he said, warning that sensitive information may already have been quietly copied before detection.

As the investigation continues, the incident highlights that government systems remain prime targets and that maintaining public confidence depends on strong defenses, clear communication, and accountability.

The post UK Government Data Stolen in Cyberattack appeared first on IT Security Guru.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Despite CISOs’ formidable training efforts on behalf of teams, a commonly overlooked phenomenon is the human tendency to freeze amidst a crisis. Building your incident response operations around this ingrained aspect of psychology can help prevent your teams from seizing up during intense and urgent situations.

In the event of an intrusion or ransomware attack, how exactly will your security team respond? Will they take an aggressive approach, pass the potato, or involuntarily experience fear-based paralysis?

While CISOs commonly contend that their staff has the expertise and training required to fight off a cyber attack, there’s still a chance that staff will freeze up when the pressure is on.

Fight, flight, freeze

Director of Human Science at Immersive Labs, Bec McKeown, says that “You may have a crisis playbook and crisis policies, and you may assume those are the first things you’ll reach for during an incident. But that’s not always the case because the way [in which] your brain works isn’t just fight or flight. It’s fight, flight or freeze.”

According to Chief Information Security Officers, freezing during a high-stakes moment isn’t so unusual. But when a security staff member or team freezes, rather than acts, it can give hackers an edge, enabling them to inflict further damage or export additional data. At the end of the day, it can also culminate in higher regulatory penalties and loss of business.

Preventing freeze

Given the very real possibility of a ‘freeze’ reaction and its negative repercussions, analysts and long-time CISOs suggest that security leaders spend time implementing new practices that can reduce the chances of occurrence. In addition, CISOs should know how to identify and dissolve the freeze response if it does occur during a security incident.

In-depth insights

Any person or team can experience what is known as ‘cognitive narrowing,’ where they are so focused on the present situation that they cannot contextualize the event. In short, cognitive narrowing prevents people from thinking in the way that they usually do, creating the ‘freeze’ response. It’s just part of human nature.

Cyber security leader Neil Harper, who now serves as a board director with ISACA, observed a team freeze in response to a ransomware attack. Says Harper, “They literally did not know what to do, even though they had some experience with [incident response] walkthroughs…They were in panic mode.”

In some instances, teams that freeze are afraid that their actions will come across as overreactions. In other cases, teams are paralyzed by the fear of being blamed. In yet other situations, no team members have had real-world cyber event experience, meaning that no one feels sufficiently confident to lead an attack response.

Actionable takeaways

Prevent the freeze effect. Here’s how:

1. Examine your drills and add components that can better enable teams to prepare for real cyber attacks. As you team moves through drills, bring up new things that aren’t normally in your playbook. For example, ahead of time, discretely request for an employee to deliberately make a wrong move during the drill. This will help your team work through an unexpected or deteriorating situation.

2. Try out a countdown clock during drills. This forces teams to make progress against adversaries under intense pressure – the kind of pressure that they would feel during a real cyber security incident. While it might feel like an uncomfortable exercise, it builds muscle memory that can help incident responders swiftly squash an actual cyber attack.

3. Consider involving enterprise executives in cyber security drills, as they too are liable to experience the ‘freeze’ phenomenon during an incident. For example, you may see your CFO withhold financial information that is needed as an incident unfolds.

4. If possible, you may want to hire cyber security staff members who have experience working through breaches and hacks. Alternatively, consider a contract with an outside incident response team that does this type of work on a routine basis.

5. Further, consider creating channels that would allow for security employees to suggest creative solutions to problems during a live incident. Employees should feel comfortable enough to suggest solutions under even the most stressful of security situations.

For more cyber security insights, please see CyberTalk.org’s past coverage. Lastly, unpack transformative insights, and learn about how to make your organization more agile and secure when you subscribe to the Cybertalk.org newsletter.

The post Must-know ways to overcome the much-dreaded ‘freeze’ response appeared first on CyberTalk.