On February 5, 2026, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) took a decisive step to bolster the nation’s digital defenses by launching Operation Winter SHIELD (Securing Homeland Infrastructure by Enhancing Layered Defense). This campaign, as reported by the FBI and covered by the HIPAA Journal, is designed to strengthen the cyber resilience of industry, government, and the critical infrastructure that underpins everyday life in the United States. The initiative aligns closely with the National Cyber Strategy and the FBI’s own Cyber Strategy, both of which emphasize partnership between public and private sectors to detect, confront, and ultimately dismantle cyber threats.
The urgency behind Operation Winter SHIELD is not difficult to understand. In recent years, the costs associated with cyberattacks have soared. According to a 2025 survey of 1,700 IT and engineering professionals cited by TechTarget, high-impact IT outages now carry a median cost of $2 million per hour—yes, that’s roughly $33,000 every minute. Annual losses average $76 million per organization. IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report further underscores the stakes: breaches contained within 200 days averaged $3.87 million in losses, while those that dragged on longer saw costs balloon to $5.01 million. The damage isn’t limited to the bottom line; organizations also grapple with prolonged downtime, regulatory penalties, and, perhaps most damaging, a battered reputation.
Recognizing this, the FBI’s Operation Winter SHIELD offers a practical roadmap for securing both information technology (IT) and operational technology (OT) environments. The campaign kicked off with ten high-impact recommendations, developed in collaboration with domestic and international partners, to address the most pressing cyber risks and close common security gaps. Over the next ten weeks, the FBI plans to publish further guidance on each measure, ensuring organizations have the tools and knowledge they need to stay a step ahead of adversaries.
The ten recommendations are straightforward yet powerful:
First, organizations are urged to adopt phishing-resistant authentication. Many breaches begin with stolen credentials from phishing attacks, making this a critical first line of defense. Second, the FBI recommends implementing a risk-based vulnerability management program, as attackers often exploit known, unpatched vulnerabilities in operating systems, software, and firmware to gain initial access.
Third, tracking and retiring end-of-life technology on a defined schedule is essential. Software and devices that no longer receive updates are prime targets for cybercriminals. Fourth, managing third-party risk is vital; a company’s security is often only as strong as its least-protected vendor with access to its network or data.
Fifth, protecting and preserving security logs is crucial for detection, response, and attribution. Threat actors frequently delete logs to cover their tracks. Sixth, the FBI emphasizes maintaining offline, immutable backups and regularly testing restoration procedures. Backups are only as good as their ability to be restored quickly and effectively when disaster strikes.
Seventh, organizations should identify, inventory, and protect internet-facing systems and services, eliminating unnecessary exposure and reducing the attack surface. Eighth, strengthening email authentication and protections against malicious content is a must, as email remains one of the most common vectors for initial access.
Ninth, reducing administrator privileges can limit the damage if credentials are compromised, slowing or halting an attacker’s ability to escalate their access. Finally, the FBI advises exercising incident response plans with all stakeholders. Testing these plans in advance allows for rapid, coordinated responses that can minimize the impact of a successful compromise.
Yet, as a detailed analysis published on February 5, 2026, by TechTarget makes clear, even the best-laid incident response plans can fall apart when real-world events hit. The reasons are as varied as they are sobering. Poorly written plans, unclear roles, and a lack of decision-making hierarchies can all stymie response efforts. Daniel Kennedy, an analyst at S&P Global Market Intelligence, noted, "Some plans I've seen become overly technical and are out of date the moment they're completed. Some start to read like a legal policy document and, thus, the people who have to execute steps in the plan don't understand what they're supposed to do."
Beyond the plan itself, human dynamics play a major role. When senior managers without clearly defined incident response roles insert themselves into active incidents, they can override established procedures and derail the response. Kennedy pointed out, "A common problem occurs when senior managers... insert themselves into active incident response, overriding established procedures and previously agreed-upon response steps. That person usually has enough organizational power to start people doing other things, or can demand people stop to answer their questions, but hasn't invested enough time in knowing the plan that was carefully written in calm seas."
Tools and access can also be stumbling blocks. Elvia Finalle, an analyst at Omdia, explained, "Incident response plans frequently assume access to tools and technologies that may not be properly configured, maintained or accessible during an actual incident." She emphasized the need for backup systems that have been tested—not just in theory, but in practice under pressure.
Real-world incidents rarely unfold under ideal conditions. Plans often assume key personnel are available, systems work as expected, and external resources respond immediately. "Reality delivers the opposite," Finalle said. "Incidents typically occur during weekends, holidays or when key team members are unavailable. Critical systems fail to respond as documented, backup communication channels don't work and external forensic firms are already engaged with other clients."
To keep up with evolving threats, especially those involving artificial intelligence, incident response plans need to be consistently revised and upgraded. Finalle stressed, "Plans for incident response need to be consistently revised and upgraded as hacking mechanisms change, especially in the AI area."
Practice makes perfect—or at least, better prepared. Organizations with resilient plans conduct monthly tabletop exercises, quarterly simulations, and annual full-scale drills. Mari DeGrazia, director of incident response at IDX, observed, "This repetitive practice ensures that when adrenaline kicks in during a real incident, teams automatically execute procedures without hesitation or confusion." However, many companies skip these exercises, and when they do hold them, senior management is often absent.
Effective incident response is a team sport. IT and security operations may lead the charge, but legal, communications, business, and HR departments all play crucial roles. As Finalle put it, "One of the most common reasons incident response plans fail is the lack of cross-functional input during their development." If only the security team knows the plan exists, it’s unlikely to be effective in a crisis.
Organizational culture and risk appetite also shape how incident response unfolds. Andrew Braunberg, another Omdia analyst, noted that culture influences funding, team structure, and even the willingness to act under pressure. Training, communication, and regular testing are critical for ensuring that, when the pressure is on, teams can bring order to chaos and react decisively.
The FBI’s Operation Winter SHIELD is a timely reminder that while cyber threats are relentless, resilience is within reach. By following concrete recommendations, fostering teamwork, and rigorously testing plans, organizations can weather the storm—and maybe, just maybe, come out stronger on the other side.