Estimated reading time: 8 minutes
Gray-zone aggression now slips into boardrooms through the cracks of ordinary days. A new Willis report calls it a material threat to modern businesses. That report, “Hidden threats, real impacts,” maps tactics of the “gray” that sits between peace and war. Attackers choose deniable moves that still bruise markets and rattle confidence. Picture an unknown neighbor who borrows your garden hose at night. You wake to puddles, snapped stems, and a yard that looks slightly sabotaged. You never see the hand that did it, yet you pay for the mess. The report says hostile states use the same trick on firms and supply chains. They turn geopolitics into a prank that still wrecks the yard. Executives and insurers must read the fine print before the next “accident” arrives.
Report Summary
The report describes a “new operating reality” for global commerce. Adversaries favor actions that stay deniable and cheap. They still create high-impact outcomes. The authors list cyber intrusions, disinformation, economic retaliation, GPS interference, and sabotage. They also flag undersea cable attacks and shadow fleet activity. The private sector sits inside the blast radius. Companies hold the assets and networks attackers want.
Elisabeth Braw, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, . “Governments, institutions, infrastructure, and companies have been targeted by a far larger variety of gray-zone activities,” she writes. She also describes this area as “in the gray-zone between war and peace.” The report warns that executives should be prepared and work together. It recommends building stronger defenses and planning for business continuity.
Why Insurers Care
Gray-zone aggression challenges the way insurance policies are written. Policies usually have clear definitions that separate an “act of war” from “sabotage” or “crime.” The report says that uncertainty makes these categories less clear. It uses Nord Stream as an example. Explosions damaged the pipeline in 2022, and the owner later sued insurers for €400 million, according to the report. Now, coverage depends on how events are defined and who is responsible.
Jared Seth, a leader in aviation and space at WTW, explains the issue. “The challenge with gray-zone activity is that it does not necessarily fit into the neat definitions that the insurance sector relies on.” This is especially true for cyber insurance. Cyber incidents often do not have clear sources. Claims teams still need proof and specific policy language to process claims.
The report recommends that experts review policy wording, triggers, and coverage limits. It also suggests looking at coverage beyond standard property insurance. This includes political violence, terrorism, sabotage, and expropriation. The report also highlights trade disruption policies for business interruptions that do not involve physical damage.
What The Threat Looks Like In Practice
The report connects this trend to what executives are feeling. WTW’s 2025 Political Risk Survey found that 77% of executives are most concerned about economic retaliation. It also found that 64% are focused on state-sponsored cyber threats, and 44% are focused on infrastructure attacks. These numbers show that the threat is mixed. The report also says gray-zone risk has increased quickly over the past five years.
Attackers take advantage of how connected modern supply chains are. They target ports, railways, roads, power grids, and telecom networks. They also go after brands and companies linked to national identity. The report says the goal is always the same: attackers want to create chaos and fear, weaken trust in public institutions, and gain leverage without starting open conflict.
The report flags a “gray-zone gig economy.” It describes workers recruited through apps for one-off tasks. Payment follows completion. That model reduces sponsors’ detection risk. It also complicates investigations for victims and governments.
Case Studies Across Sectors
Shipping and logistics sit at the front door of global trade. The report lists harassment of merchant vessels and interference with routes. It also lists sudden customs slowdowns and regulatory pressure and warns about cyberattacks on logistics management systems. It also highlights AIS manipulation and “shadow fleet” tactics. Simon Lockwood of Willis Marine warns that innocent parties end up paying the bill. “The costs fall back to the innocent parties,” he says.
The report highlights incidents with serious operational impacts. It mentions parcel bombs found at DHL facilities in Leipzig, Warsaw, and Vilnius in 2024. It also notes sabotage on a rail track near Warsaw in 2025, which is a key route for aid to Ukraine. The report describes drone incursions that closed the Danish and Munich airports in 2025 and connects aviation risks to GPS jamming and spoofing.
Defense manufacturing faces a blend of physical and cyber risks. The report cites an alleged assassination attempt against Rheinmetall’s CEO. It cites testimony about other executive plots. It also lists IP theft, espionage, and supply chain infiltration. These threats target both people and production systems.
Get The Cyber Insurance News Upload Delivered
Subscribe to our newsletter!
Critical Infrastructure Examples
Critical infrastructure appears across the report’s examples. It cites the 2021 Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack. It cites Nord Stream again as physical sabotage with strategic overtones. Then there’s the Red Sea cable cuts that affected 25% of Asia–Europe internet traffic, according to the report. It describes mysterious break-ins at Swedish and Finnish water plants in 2024. The report says such acts aim to disrupt daily life.
Government and society-level influence operations also drive business risk. The report cites “serious cases” of foreign interference in Moldovan elections, observers said. It notes cyberattacks and disinformation. It links polarization to policy volatility and business uncertainty. The report also cites a major fire at a Polish shopping mall in 2024. Polish officials alleged Russian involvement, it says.
Readiness Guidance For Cyber And Risk Leaders
The report provides practical steps for being prepared. It recommends ongoing geopolitical monitoring and sharing intelligence. Sam Wilkin warns about weak points, saying, “Our societies are only as resilient to gray-zone attacks as their weakest link.” He also points out that many companies gather intelligence but do not share it internally, which creates gaps.
The report encourages scenario planning and practice exercises. WTW and Braw created a three-year program that included scenario planning and wargaming. The report describes three scenarios focused on Europe: one about shadow fleet disruptions in the English Channel, one about coordinated attacks on Poland involving cable interference and rail disruption, and one about destabilization in Moldova driven by disinformation. These are presented as structured “what if” exercises.
Braw clearly explains the business impact in the press release. “Hostile countries are targeting companies precisely because doing so creates disruption and uncertainty,” she said. She highlights “plausible deniability” and “minimal risk of retaliation.” This situation puts more responsibility on risk leaders, insurers, and those who write policies.
Frequently Asked Questions
Gray-zone aggression uses deniable tactics between peace and war. Braw calls it action “in the gray-zone between war and peace”.
Attackers exploit global interdependence and digital opacity. The report says this risk barely registered five years ago.
They target networks, data, logistics routes, and operational technology. They also target brands that shape public confidence.
Adversaries use state-sponsored intrusions and proxy ransomware. They also use disinformation campaigns and data leaks.
Sponsors hide behind cutouts and criminal crews. Investigators often need time for forensics and intelligence sharing.
Ambiguity complicates causation and triggers. It also pressures war exclusions and “warlike acts” language.
Review war, terrorism, and sabotage definitions. Review non-damage interruption wording and dependent business clauses.
They need evidence of controls and crisis readiness. They also need exposure mapping for suppliers and critical services.
Expect disputes over attribution and timing. Build playbooks for partial evidence and fast-changing public narratives.
The report cites Red Sea cable cuts and water facility break-ins. It also cites the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack.
Use scenario planning and war gaming. Refresh scenarios often and share intelligence across teams.
She cites “plausible deniability” plus “minimal risk of retaliation”. She urges early recognition of Gray-zone aggression.
Related Cyber Insurance Posts
- Ghost Students Exploit Aid as Identity Theft Surges Nationwide – NEW PODCAST
- Fools Rush In – AI Security Lags as Breaches Rise: IBM’s 2025 Data Breach Report
- Deepfake Defense: Reality Defender Launches Real Suite for Day-One Enterprise Protection
- Cybersecurity Starts With Understanding: Graylog’s Kimber Spradlin on Data Clarity, AI Limits, Cyber Hygiene and Mom
- Cyber Insurance Claims Data Shows Criminals Shift To Data Theft And Long-Tail Damage
