Cyber Sovereignty Starts with Threat Exposure Visibility

A country’s sovereignty extends beyond physical boundaries into digital borders, which, with the rise of cloud and IOT (or Internet of Things adoption), is amorphous. States need to protect and independently control virtual assets, digital communications and citizen data in a way which allows nations to develop and innovate according to the needs of their citizens.

This has introduced new complexities as Nations increasingly rely on private technology companies (software as a service or other software ecosystems), which are controlled by foreign entities. This new dependency increases the risk of weaponisation of these services in a way which leverages them for political or economic coercion without physical warfare.

One way to understand this risk better is by increasing the visibility of this (and other) exposure across the full attack surface of a Nation’s digital infrastructure. It provides the operational intelligence for the proactive protection of assets to bridge the gap between ‘ownership’ and ‘control’. A not insignificant change when we consider that digital sovereignty spans critical, intertwined sectors (energy, healthcare, education, etc.)

As this digital and connected infrastructure evolves, new vulnerabilities emerge fluidly. Models like Continuous Threat Exposure Management (or CTEM) enable nations to move beyond static risk measures to dynamic resilience. It allows nations to actively defend sovereignty and elevate visibility to permanent, operational function and not an occasional project.

Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) is a strategic, ongoing cycle of identifying, validating, prioritising and remediating exposure across the digital landscape of any entity or state. It replaces point-in-time assessments and enables constant defence adaptation. Enabling nations to operate the way cyber threat actors do: 24/7.

A key conceptual difference between CTEM and traditional models is that CTEM assumes that exposures can and must be eliminated before exploitation. It moves nation states away from the ‘detect and react model’. Exposure-driven resilience prevents adversaries from achieving footholds, even if they breach a single vector.

The benefit to governments, which can be particularly siloed in nature, is that it creates visibility across networks, critical infrastructure and private sector dependencies. By using this model, governments are then encouraged to prioritise vulnerabilities based on exploitable attack paths and not generic CVSS scores. In turn, this encourages the assignment of limited resources to the highest risk of breach exposures. AI-based Attack Path Simulation then validates defences safely without impacting the operational environment by predicting lateral movement risks and testing organisational readiness. This can lead to more robust economic stability, an enhanced reputation for digital trust and increases in diplomatic leverage by demonstrating cyber-resilience.

Threat actors targeting sovereign assets are no longer focused solely on espionage; their objectives now include the disruption and destruction of critical government operations and national infrastructure. These attacks reveal common patterns: supply chain weakness, visibility gaps and critical exposure. Understanding these failures is crucial for nations seeking to build resilient, exposure-driven cybersecurity frameworks.

NotPetya (Ukraine, 2017)

Summary: Originally targeted Ukrainian systems through MeDoc tax software supply chain compromise. The malware quickly spread worldwide, affecting Maersk, Merck, FedEx, and others. The estimated total global damages exceeded10 billion USD.

Key Lessons:

• Supply Chain Risk: Third-party software can become a national vulnerability amplifier.
• Lack of Real-Time Visibility: Malware moved undetected until widespread damage occurred.
• Global Escalation: A localised cyberattack can trigger global crises within hours.
• National Strategy Implication: Nations must continuously monitor and validate software supply chain exposures.

Source: Advanced Threat Analytics security research network technical analysis: NotPetya, Microsoft, 2017

Colonial Pipeline (USA, 2021)

Summary: DarkSide ransomware attack forced the shutdown of the largest US fuel pipeline. This triggered widespread fuel shortages and emergency declarations across the US East Coast.

Key Lessons:

• Single Points of Failure: Critical infrastructure with centralised control points are high-value targets.
• Exposure Blind Spots: Inadequate real-time visibility delayed breach detection and response.
• OT/IT Convergence Risks: Legacy operational systems connected to modern IT networks expand attack surfaces.
• Need for Cross-Sector Exposure Coordination: Response required federal, state, and private collaboration — highlighting the need for national playbooks.

Source: Colonial Pipeline hacker Darkside reaped $90M from 47 victims, Fox Business, 2018

Saudi Aramco Attacks (2012 & 2021)

Summary: In 2012 , the Shamoon malware wiped 30,000 computers, severely disrupting operations. In 2021 , a data extortion attack exposed sensitive files; cybercriminals demanded ransom.

Key Lessons:

• Basic Cyber Hygiene Still Matters: Unsegmented networks, weak credential management enabled devastating initial intrusions.
• Critical Infrastructure as Geopolitical Target: Energy sector organisations are persistent targets for both cybercriminals and state-linked actors.

Continuous Validation Needed: Exposure management must go beyond once-a-year checks; frequent testing of segmentation, credential policies, and recovery capabilities is essential.

Security experts at IBM published a report that includes precious details on the attack chain of the dreader Shamoon cyberweapon, Security Affairs 2017

All three of these examples illustrate the need for supply chain cyber risk understanding at a detailed level. Real time or continuous exposure management could have rapidly mitigated or contained the impact – including those felt from localised attacks which produce nation-scale disruptions.

To embed exposure-driven resilience at the national level, governments must take decisive action guided by the CTEM (Continuous Threat Exposure Management) framework. The following strategic initiatives will enable nations to proactively defend sovereignty, protect critical infrastructure, and enhance national competitiveness:

Recommended Actions:

1. Mandate continuous exposure mapping across all critical infrastructure sectors to build comprehensive situational awareness and enable accurate national defense prioritisation.
2. Establish formal public-private threat intelligence partnerships to enable unified, real-time visibility and dynamic national cyber defense coordination.
3. Implement continuously updated exposure prioritisation frameworks to eliminate risk blindness and focus national resources on the most exploitable, high-impact vulnerabilities.
4. Develop adaptive crisis response playbooks based on continuous exposure intelligence to dramatically reduce breach containment times and prevent cascading systemic failures.
5. Incentivise and cross-sector exposure-sharing formalise alliances to strengthen national resilience and collective defense across critical industries.

As adversaries evolve and exposure risks multiply, nations that adopt an exposure-driven cybersecurity posture will define the next era of security, prosperity, and resilience. CTEM offers a proven, dynamic framework to move beyond reactive defense toward active sovereignty preservation. The nations that act nowwill not only defend their autonomy but lead the global digital future. Those who delay will find their security shaped by others. Sovereignty today is not won by might alone, but by mastering visibility across every area of cyberspace.