A defining dilemma: when cyber ceases to be collateral
When cyberattacks move from isolated incidents to a synchronized part of military campaigns, where does that leave companies whose networks were never meant to be battlefields? That is the question raised by Mark Montgomery of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, who warns that the posture of modern warfare is changing in ways that increase risk to private-sector enterprises.
The shift in how cyber is used
According to Montgomery, cyber operations are no longer lone actors on a conflict stage. Instead, cyber tools are being woven into broader military strategy and used in conjunction with kinetic action. This integration changes the character of cyber activity from episodic disruption to an element of coordinated statecraft and force projection.
Immediate consequences for companies and infrastructure
Montgomery cautions that as militaries integrate cyber and kinetic action, private sector enterprises face greater exposure to geopolitical threats. That exposure stems from two core facts he emphasizes: cyber effects are now positioned to serve strategic military objectives, and many companies operate systems and services that sit in the path of those effects. The result, he argues, is a higher likelihood that commercial networks, platforms, and suppliers will be affected by actions driven by state conflict dynamics rather than by criminal opportunism alone.
Why this matters — across perspectives
- For technologists: the melding of cyber and kinetic demands new design priorities for resilience, segmentation, and contingency planning, because disruptions may be deliberate components of broader operations rather than isolated attacks.
- For policymakers: the trend raises questions about legal frameworks, attribution, and responsibilities for defending civilian infrastructure when conflict-related cyber effects spill over into the private sector.
- For companies and users: the implication is more than operational inconvenience; it is a strategic risk calculus that requires board-level attention, cross-sector coordination, and investments in readiness beyond standard cybersecurity hygiene.
- For adversaries and strategists: integrating cyber into military campaigns expands options for shaping outcomes below the threshold of open war, altering incentives and risk calculations for state and nonstate actors alike.
Conclusion: an expanding front with no easy boundaries
Mark Montgomery’s warning reframes a familiar conversation: cyber is not merely a tool of disruption but increasingly an instrument of state strategy with spillover effects for commerce and daily life. As cyber operations and kinetic plans converge, the line between battlefield and marketplace grows blurrier. Who will draw the new boundaries of protection — and who will be liable when those lines are crossed — are questions that public and private leaders must answer before the next conflict makes the choice for them.
https://www.govinfosecurity.com/expanding-role-cyberattacks-in-modern-conflicts-a-31370
