Cyber-risk analytics firms have reported heightened activity among threat actors and affiliated hacktivist groups since the outbreak of the Middle East war. This includes distributed denial-of-service attacks, phishing campaigns, and attempts to compromise corporate networks and critical infrastructure.

To date, there have been no public reports of large insured cyber-related losses directly attributable to the Middle East war. Most incidents appear to have disrupted services or systems without generating significant insured losses. However, while the war’s impact on insurers’ cyber portfolios currently appears limited, the situation remains fluid and could escalate further, especially once the physical warfare concludes.

An escalation of malicious cyberactivity into larger, coordinated, state-linked attacks could severely test underwriting models, raise accumulation risk, and spark legal disputes over coverage. That said, insurers have been refining their cyber policy wording over the past few years, particularly around war-related exclusions and state-sponsored cyber activity, in order to clarify the coverage boundaries. At the same time, underwriting frameworks increasingly incorporate cyber-risk analytics, threat intelligence, and geopolitical risk assessments to better understand systemic exposure.

“Our focus remains on insurers’ risk management practices, portfolio diversification, and operational resilience,” said S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Manuel Adam. “Overall, the Middle East war highlights the growing interconnection between cyber risk, geopolitics, and insurance, reinforcing the importance of clear policy language, prudent underwriting, and robust operational safeguards to maintain portfolio resilience,” Mr. Adam added.