EU Cybersecurity Forecast 2026: What Leaders Must Reframe Now
- Reto Zeidler
- Jan 12
- 2 min read
Across the EU, threat intelligence and policy analysis point to the same pattern: attackers are combining AI-enabled techniques with geopolitical objectives, while organisations struggle to align cyber resilience with decision-making speed.
At the same time, regulatory expectations are rising. NIS2 enforcement, DORA supervision, and data protection scrutiny are converging. Leaders are being asked not just whether controls exist, but whether governance actually works under stress.

"What leaders often underestimate is not the sophistication of attackers, but the organizational friction they create for themselves."
Cyber risk in 2026 is less about unknown threats and more about known exposures that remain unresolved because they sit between functions: IT, security, legal, procurement, and operations. AI amplifies this by lowering the cost of attack and increasing the speed of exploitation.

From a leadership perspective, cyber security is now a test of decision quality.
How fast can risk be prioritised, owned, and acted on when signals are incomplete and consequences are asymmetric?
Cyber risk oversight must move from periodic reporting to continuous steering, with clear thresholds for executive intervention.
External exposure, including suppliers and cloud dependencies, requires board-level visibility, not just technical monitoring.
AI use inside the organisation increases accountability, not deniability. Leaders remain responsible for outcomes, regardless of automation.
Incident readiness must be treated as an operational capability, comparable to financial liquidity or business continuity.
In 2026, resilience will not be defined by how many controls you have, but by how decisively leaders act when those controls are tested. Cyber security has become a governance discipline: the organisations that recognise this early will absorb shocks; the rest will explain them.






Comments