Maritime Cybersecurity
Protection for ships and ports
What it is
Maritime cybersecurity protects ships, ports and the maritime supply chain from cyber attack, covering both the information systems that run the business and the operational technology that moves the vessel and the cargo. A port can be closed by code as effectively as by blockade.
How it is employed
Protection is applied across the fleet and the port estate: continuous monitoring of vessel and terminal networks, hardening of navigation, propulsion and cargo-handling systems, and incident response that understands ships as floating industrial control systems rather than office networks.
Why it matters now
Ports and shipping have been repeatedly disrupted by cyber operations across the region, and maritime OT is often decades old and never designed for a hostile network. For trading nations, port continuity is a matter of national resilience, not corporate IT.
Procurement & integration
Maritime cyber engagements begin with an estate assessment across vessels, terminals and the supply chain, then move to continuous monitoring and hardening. Unstrat delivers this through one accountable team with no foreign-government reporting line on what is found.
Capability
- Proven fleet-wide: 1,500+ vessels and 50+ ship managers protected, 100,000+ threats blocked daily, 99.97% fleet uptime. Fleet-level monitoring means a shore security team sees every vessel from one picture, spots the same intrusion pattern arriving across hulls, and does not wait for a master to phone in a problem the ship's crew cannot diagnose
- Ship OT versus IT, treated as the separate problems they are. The corporate network the crew emails from is one surface; the navigation bus, engine controls, ballast and cargo automation are another, older, harder to patch and unforgiving of downtime. A compromise on the IT side leaks data. A compromise on the OT side moves a rudder or a valve. The eight-module fleet platform (firewall, privileged access, detection, satellite management and AI-powered threat operations, with IACS E26 compliance) is built around that distinction rather than bolting IT tools onto a bridge
- Hardware-based passive intrusion detection for ship navigation buses (NMEA 2000), invisible to every other device on the bus. It listens rather than injects, so it can watch the traffic that steers and positions the ship without becoming one more thing that can fail the equipment it is meant to protect
- On-vessel edge compute governed from shore: virtual machines, centralised patching, snapshots, rollbacks and east-west OT monitoring. A ship at sea has intermittent bandwidth and no on-call engineer, so patches, backups and recovery have to be pushed and verified from shore and survive a satellite link that drops mid-transfer. That is the incident-response reality maritime security ignores: the responder is thousands of miles from the casualty, and the crew are the first, sometimes only, hands on the system
- Port and terminal systems, not just the hulls. Terminal operating systems, gate automation, crane and gantry controls and the vessel-to-shore data exchange are OT estates in their own right, and an attacker who cannot reach a ship at sea can often reach the terminal it is about to call at
- Crew and vendor remote access, governed. Ships carry a rotating crew and a long tail of equipment vendors who expect remote sessions into navigation, engine and cargo systems for diagnostics and updates. Privileged-access control decides who reaches which OT system, when, and with a record of what they did, because the most common way onto a ship's OT is a legitimate account, not a novel exploit
- High-fidelity maritime cyber range with real protocols and PLCs for crew training, certification and equipment research (IACS E27), so crews rehearse an incident on realistic bridge and navigation systems before they meet one at sea
- Informed by real vulnerability research on vessel control systems, including CVSS 10.0 findings in production fleets. What we defend against is what we found ourselves, not a generic threat catalogue
The Unstrat difference
01Independent, non-aligned origin, with no political exposure to any major-power ecosystem.
02One accountable team from first briefing through delivery and in-region sustainment.
03Built by maritime security researchers, proven on 1,500+ vessels at sea, informed by the OT vulnerabilities we found in real bridge and navigation systems.
Sourcing routes compared
| Consideration | Major-power prime | Independent principal via Unstrat |
|---|---|---|
| Disclosure | Findings may be reportable to a foreign government | What is found in your estate stays accountable to you |
| Coverage | IT-centric providers treat ships as office networks | OT and IT covered together: vessel, terminal and supply chain |
| Political conditions | Disclosure rules, re-export restrictions and upgrade approvals held by a foreign government | Independent, non-aligned origin, accountable to the buyer's flag |
| Accountability | Multiple contractors and a foreign prime's release schedule | One accountable team from first briefing through delivery and in-region sustainment |
Comparison is qualitative. Detailed specifications are shared under briefing once the export-control position for your market is confirmed.
Related capabilities
View all →
Maritime Cybersecurity: questions
What is Maritime Cybersecurity?
Maritime Cybersecurity is Unstrat's Sea (Maritime Domain) capability: Cyber protection built by maritime security researchers and proven on 1,500+ vessels at sea. One integrated suite spanning fleet platform, hardware intrusion detection on navigation buses, on-vessel edge compute and crew training, covering the OT and IT estates that keep ships and harbours running.
How does Maritime Cybersecurity work?
Maritime Cybersecurity delivers its effect through proven fleet-wide: 1,500+ vessels and 50+ ship managers protected, 100,000+ threats blocked daily, 99.97% fleet uptime. Fleet-level monitoring means a shore security team sees every vessel from one picture, spots the same intrusion pattern arriving across hulls, and does not wait for a master to phone in a problem the ship's crew cannot diagnose, Ship OT versus IT, treated as the separate problems they are. The corporate network the crew emails from is one surface; the navigation bus, engine controls, ballast and cargo automation are another, older, harder to patch and unforgiving of downtime. A compromise on the IT side leaks data. A compromise on the OT side moves a rudder or a valve. The eight-module fleet platform (firewall, privileged access, detection, satellite management and AI-powered threat operations, with IACS E26 compliance) is built around that distinction rather than bolting IT tools onto a bridge and Hardware-based passive intrusion detection for ship navigation buses (NMEA 2000), invisible to every other device on the bus. It listens rather than injects, so it can watch the traffic that steers and positions the ship without becoming one more thing that can fail the equipment it is meant to protect, capabilities matched to the requirement and confirmed under briefing rather than published.
Who provides Maritime Cybersecurity?
Maritime Cybersecurity is delivered by The Cybersecurity Group, whose focus is cyber & critical-infrastructure security. Unstrat represents The Cybersecurity Group to government and enterprise buyers worldwide as an independent, non-aligned prime vendor.
Who uses Maritime Cybersecurity?
Government and enterprise buyers acquire Maritime Cybersecurity to address piracy & armed robbery at sea and port security across the maritime domain, matched to the mission and accountable to them, not to a foreign vendor's government.
Why choose Maritime Cybersecurity over a major-power alternative?
Maritime Cybersecurity is sourced from an independent, non-aligned provider, so it carries no major-power disclosure rules, upgrade-locks or political ramifications. Concretely: built by maritime security researchers, proven on 1,500+ vessels at sea, informed by the OT vulnerabilities we found in real bridge and navigation systems. The capability is accountable to you, not to a foreign vendor's government and its release schedule.
How is Maritime Cybersecurity procured, and where can it be delivered?
Vessel OT, port systems and offshore platforms each carry different risks than the corporate network sharing the same steel. Maritime cybersecurity that works treats them as the industrial control systems they are: navigation buses, propulsion SCADA and terminal crane controls monitored continuously, hardened without dry-dock downtime, accountable to your flag rather than a foreign government's disclosure rules. Every engagement begins with a briefing, and export eligibility is confirmed per market under briefing rather than published. Where controlled capabilities are involved, the classification and end-user-certificate chain is confirmed first. Maritime Cybersecurity is then sustained in-region by one accountable team from briefing through long-term operation.
Questions buyers ask
What does maritime cybersecurity cover?
It covers ships, ports and the maritime supply chain, protecting both the information systems that run the business and the operational technology that moves the vessel and the cargo. As we put it, a port can be closed by code as effectively as by blockade. It treats a ship as a floating industrial control system, not an office network.
See: Maritime cybersecurity capabilityIT against OT security
Is port cyber security a national resilience issue?
For trading nations it is. Port continuity is a matter of national resilience rather than corporate IT, because a closed terminal stops trade the same way a blockade would. Ports and shipping across the region have already been disrupted by cyber operations, and much maritime OT is decades old and never designed for a hostile network.
Why cover ship OT and IT together?
Because IT-centric providers treat ships as office networks and miss the systems that actually move the vessel. We cover the operational technology and the information technology together, across vessel, terminal and supply chain, so navigation, propulsion and cargo-handling are hardened alongside the business systems.
Maritime cyber protection with no foreign disclosure line
That is the core of our procurement model. We deliver the estate assessment, continuous monitoring and hardening through one accountable team with no foreign-government reporting line on what is found. Whatever surfaces in your fleet and port estate stays accountable to you.
Where does maritime cyber sit in a critical-infrastructure programme?
It is one strand of critical-infrastructure resilience alongside infrastructure hardening, defensive operations and off-grid architectures. A port is national infrastructure, so the same accountable channel that hardens power and water can harden the terminal estate, with non-destructive inspection verifying the physical side.
See: Critical-infrastructure resilienceInfrastructure hardening
Maritime cyber capability for a coast guard, not a shipping line
The doctrine is the same whether the hulls are naval or commercial: continuous monitoring of vessel and terminal networks and hardening of the navigation, propulsion and cargo systems. Where a coast guard also needs a picture of its waters, maritime cyber pairs with ocean surveillance and fisheries analytics in one maritime domain awareness programme.
See: Maritime domain awareness solutionOcean surveillance capability
How does the maritime cyber route differ from the major-power route?
The published contrast is about disclosure and coverage. A major-power route may make findings reportable to a foreign government and tends to treat ships as office networks; ours keeps findings accountable to you and covers OT and IT together across vessel, terminal and supply chain, with independent origin accountable to your flag.
Does maritime cyber connect to offensive testing and defensive operations?
Yes. The same portfolio runs authorised red-teaming against vessels and ports, and continuous defensive operations for fleets at sea. The reference page maps maritime cyber alongside defensive cybersecurity, so assessment, testing and monitoring can be procured through one channel rather than assembled from separate contractors.
We run a national port authority and a naval fleet under one ministry. Can maritime cyber cover both estates through a single accountable team?
That is how we structure the engagement. A maritime cyber programme begins with an estate assessment across vessels, terminals and the supply chain, then moves to continuous monitoring and hardening, all through one accountable team. There is no foreign-government reporting line, so a mixed naval and commercial estate stays under a single line of accountability to you.
See: Maritime cybersecurity capabilityThe maritime cyber product
Our maritime OT is decades old and was built by foreign vendors. How does a maritime cyber programme approach that reality?
It approaches ships as floating industrial control systems rather than office networks, which is the whole point of covering OT and IT together. Because much of the installed base is old and never designed for a hostile network, the work starts with an assessment of the estate as it actually is before monitoring and hardening are applied.
See: IT against OT securityMaritime cybersecurity capability
Can a maritime cyber programme grow into a wider awareness capability for our exclusive economic zone?
Yes, because it is designed to sit inside maritime domain awareness. Maritime cyber hardens the ships and ports that hold the picture together, while ocean surveillance detects and tracks vessels across the zone and fisheries analytics turn that sensing into enforcement leads, all through one non-aligned channel.
What evidence should we ask a maritime cyber supplier to show before a national fleet contract?
We do not publish audited metrics on this reference page, so ask for evidence against your own fleet and regulatory framework rather than a headline number. What we do commit to is a defined chain from estate assessment through continuous monitoring and hardening, delivered by one accountable team, and you can weigh that against how any competitor structures the same work.
If maritime OT is compromised, who is accountable for the findings under a non-aligned supplier?
Accountability sits with you. Where a foreign-aligned route may make findings reportable to a foreign government, our model keeps what is found in your estate accountable to you, delivered by one team from first briefing through in-region sustainment. That independence of origin is the difference the comparison table draws out.
How does maritime cybersecurity fit a critical-infrastructure programme that also covers power, water and transport?
A port is critical national infrastructure, so maritime cyber is one strand of the same resilience programme. Infrastructure hardening and continuous defensive operations reduce and watch the cyber attack surface, off-grid architectures keep isolated systems protected, and maritime cyber extends that discipline to the terminal and the fleet, all through one accountable channel.
Can the same programme both test and defend our port and fleet networks over time?
Yes. Authorised offensive testing exposes weaknesses before an adversary does, and defensive operations then watch the estate continuously. Running both through the same accountable channel means the findings from a red-team drive the defensive programme rather than sitting in a report from a separate contractor.