The Silent Battlefield: How Social Unrest Poses Unique Challenges For Government Cybersecurity

Political instability has always been a breeding ground for chaos, unrest, and conflict. In today’s digital age, it’s not just physical protests or civil disobedience that governments need to worry about. Cyberattacks—carried out by cyber-criminals, hacktivists, state-sponsored groups, and even insiders—have become an increasingly common tactic during times of political unrest. When governments are embroiled in political instability, their vulnerabilities in the digital space are amplified, making them prime targets for malicious actors.

Here, I'll explore why local, state, and federal levels of government are targeted during times of political instability, the factors that make them more vulnerable, the elevated risk of insider threats, and the role that disinformation campaigns play in fueling unrest and enabling cyberattacks.

Why Are Governments Targeted During Political Instability?

Political instability often places a tremendous strain on government resources. Due to the nature of the crisis, governments at various levels may experience different threats. For example: City or local government may be targeted if police or sheriff's departments are in the news. State government may be identified by individuals or groups when unpopular policy decisions are enforced and federal government can be the focus when citizens oppose an unjust conflict. In some cases all levels of government could be targeted simultaneously. Agencies are tasked with managing public safety, responding to protests, and ensuring the continuity of vital services. With much of their focus shifted to addressing real-world challenges, cybersecurity can fall lower on the priority list. At the same time, the rush to implement emergency measures often leaves governments scrambling, creating openings for cyber-criminals to exploit.

Moreover, the chaos and unpredictability during such times can make governments more susceptible to attacks. Networks may be poorly secured or understaffed, and cybersecurity teams may be overwhelmed with multiple high-priority tasks. This makes it easier for attackers to breach government systems, whether by exploiting weak spots in security protocols, launching large-scale ransomware attacks, or utilizing phishing/spearphishing campaigns.

Malicious actors often view periods of political instability as prime opportunities to strike. Governments and institutions may be too distracted by the political or social chaos to mount an effective defense against cyber threats. Attackers may capitalize on the disruption to launch their own operations—whether it’s a ransomware attack to extort money, a data breach to steal sensitive information, or a denial-of-service attack to incapacitate critical systems.

Hacktivists—individuals or groups that use hacking techniques to further political or social causes—are particularly active during times of political unrest. They often target government agencies to advance their agenda, disrupt operations, or raise awareness of specific issues. During protests, for example, hacktivists may attack government systems or websites to support causes such as racial justice, anti-corruption, or anti-government sentiment. By defacing websites or releasing sensitive government data, hacktivists aim to make a statement, disrupt the status quo, and draw attention to their cause.

For financially motivated cyber-criminals, politically unstable governments represent lucrative opportunities. Ransomware attacks have been one of the most common methods used against local and national governments. In such attacks, hackers encrypt critical government data and demand large ransoms for its release. Governments, already stretched thin during periods of instability, may feel pressured to pay up to regain access to essential systems, making them prime targets for this type of extortion.

During times of political instability, governments may also become targets of state-sponsored cyberattacks. Rival nations may seek to disrupt the functioning of a government they perceive as a threat or exploit internal chaos to weaken its position on the global stage. Cyberwarfare tactics such as espionage, data breaches, and sabotage can be used to gain intelligence, destabilize a government’s operations, or even influence public opinion and political outcomes. Additionally, social unrest acts as a beacon for hacktivist groups, drawing in multiple threat actors with different motivations. Attacks can spill over from one government entity to another within close proximity, geographically or ideologically. Governments may find themselves under attack from a combination of state-sponsored actors, cyber-criminals, and hacktivists simultaneously, further straining cybersecurity teams and response efforts.

The Role of Disinformation Campaigns

Nation-state actors, seeking to further their strategic goals, have long used disinformation campaigns as a tool for manipulating public opinion and destabilizing governments. In times of political instability, disinformation can escalate unrest and create an environment ripe for cyberattacks. By amplifying division and distrust, these campaigns can fuel both physical and digital threats to the government.

Disinformation campaigns are particularly effective at fueling division within society. Nation-state actors may spread false or misleading information to deepen political polarization, exacerbate grievances, and increase public distrust in government institutions. These campaigns aim to weaken internal cohesion, making it easier for external actors to exploit the instability and further destabilize the government.

Disinformation can also play a pivotal role in influencing public opinion. During times of unrest, when people are often turning to social media for information, these campaigns can manipulate the narratives that reach the public. Whether by spreading false information about government actions, creating confusion around the causes of unrest, or distorting facts to support certain political agendas, disinformation can shape how people view the situation, sometimes pushing them to take more radical actions.

In some cases, disinformation doesn’t just fuel unrest—it can amplify the impact of cyberattacks. A successful cyberattack, such as a data breach or ransomware assault, may be paired with a disinformation campaign designed to confuse or mislead the public about the nature of the attack or the government's response. By attacking both the credibility of the government and its systems, these dual-pronged efforts can make it harder for authorities to respond effectively.

Insider Threats During Political Instability

While external cyber-criminals and hacktivists are often the primary concern, insider threats are an equally important—yet often overlooked—risk during politically unstable periods. Insider threats involve individuals within an organization who misuse their access and privileges for malicious purposes. These insiders can be employees, contractors, or others who have access to sensitive information and systems. During times of political instability, the risk of insider threats escalates for several reasons.

Employees within government organizations may feel a deep sympathy for the causes driving social unrest. If, for example, an employee is passionate about a specific issue like racial justice, environmental activism, or anti-government sentiment, they may be tempted to support these causes by misusing their position. This could include leaking sensitive information to the public, helping facilitate cyberattacks, or even assisting external hackers or activists directly.

The heightened emotional climate during times of unrest can also make insiders more susceptible to manipulation. Hackers or external groups may exploit an insider’s frustration, anger, or ideological leanings to encourage them to support a cyberattack effort. This manipulation might involve providing access to government systems, assisting with technical tasks, or even directly helping hackers breach security systems.

Attribution Challenges and False Flags

One of the most significant challenges in responding to cyberattacks during political instability is attribution. Cyber-criminals, hacktivists, and nation-state actors often go to great lengths to obscure their identities, making it difficult to determine who is behind an attack. False flags—where attackers deliberately create digital fingerprints that point to another entity—are commonly used to mislead investigators. The presence of multiple attackers also complicates attribution efforts, as overlapping attack methods and deliberately planted false flags can make it difficult to determine the true source of an attack.

Real-World Examples

• 2015, Baltimore, Maryland, became the focal point of protests following the death of Freddie Gray, a Black man who died from injuries sustained while in police custody. The protests were part of the larger Black Lives Matter movement, highlighting police brutality and racial injustice. Four years later, in 2019, the City of Baltimore fell victim to a devastating ransomware attack widely attributed to the "Ryuk" group. While there was no direct link between the protests and the attack, the incident occurred within the broader context of ongoing social tensions in the U.S. over race relations, policing, and civil rights. The ransomware attack paralyzed key municipal systems, including email, billing, and court operations, exacerbating public distrust in the city’s ability to safeguard critical infrastructure. The disruption underscored the vulnerabilities of local governments, especially in politically and socially charged environments where cybersecurity risks may not receive the attention they require.

• 2020, Minneapolis, Minnesota, became the epicenter of nationwide protests following the murder of George Floyd by a police officer. The unrest led to violent clashes between protesters and law enforcement, placing immense pressure on city officials. Around the same time, Minneapolis experienced increased cyber threats, with rising scans and probes against its systems. While no direct ransomware attack was reported, cybersecurity experts noted the heightened risk, as cities dealing with political turmoil often become prime targets for malicious actors. The situation in Minneapolis served as a stark reminder that during moments of widespread unrest, cyber-criminals, hacktivists, and even nation-state actors may seek to exploit the distraction and chaos, further complicating crisis management for local governments.

• 2020, St. Louis, Missouri, also saw significant protests as part of the racial justice movement following George Floyd’s killing. The city had already been at the center of such discussions due to the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in nearby Ferguson. Amid the protests, St. Louis became the target of a cyberattack that reportedly involved ransomware, significantly disrupting municipal computer systems, including those related to public health and safety. Though no explicit link between the cyberattack and the protests was established, the timing of the incident raised concerns about how cities embroiled in political and social unrest could be vulnerable to digital threats. The attack highlighted the pressing need for stronger cybersecurity measures within local governments, especially during periods of heightened civil tension when municipal services are already under strain.

These examples illustrate how political instability creates an environment ripe for cyber threats. Whether through opportunistic ransomware attacks, heightened system probing, or direct exploitation of chaos, malicious actors recognize that governments stretched thin by civil unrest are often less capable of defending against digital threats. As such, maintaining strong cybersecurity measures, even during moments of social upheaval, is critical to preventing further disruption and erosion of public trust.

Conclusion

Political instability not only disrupts governance but also exposes governments to heightened cybersecurity threats. The convergence of cyber-criminals, hacktivists, and nation-state actors during such times amplifies the risk of ransomware attacks, data breaches, and disinformation campaigns. Additionally, insider threats and attribution challenges further complicate response efforts.

Social unrest acts as a beacon for multiple threat actors, placing immense pressure on government cybersecurity teams already struggling to manage real-world crises. The presence of multiple attackers—each with different motivations—creates an environment where distinguishing between legitimate and deceptive threats becomes nearly impossible. False flags and overlapping tactics make attribution increasingly difficult, delaying response times and mitigation efforts.

To counter these threats, governments must prioritize cybersecurity resilience even during political turmoil. Proactive security measures, rapid response strategies, and enhanced intelligence-sharing are critical to mitigating risks. As cyberattacks become a silent battlefield in times of unrest, governments must remain vigilant, adaptive, and prepared for evolving threats in both the physical and digital domains.