Cybersecurity is often described as an arms race. Defenders innovate, attackers adapt, and the cycle repeats at ever-accelerating speed. In 2015, the United States attempted to give defenders an advantage by enacting the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA 2015). By creating a legal structure for companies to share cyber threat information with the government and each other, it sought to transform isolated defenders into a coordinated force.

That framework is now at risk of expiration, and the consequences could be profound. Without CISA 2015, the already fragile system of public-private cooperation may collapse into silence and secrecy. Attackers — whether cybercriminals or state-sponsored actors — would be the ones to benefit.

When companies experience a cyberattack, their instinct is often to minimize exposure. Acknowledging a breach can cause stock prices to plummet, invite regulatory action, and trigger lawsuits from customers or shareholders. While the SEC has issued rules requiring disclosure of material cyber incidents, enforcement remains inconsistent.

CISA 2015 offered some balance by providing liability protection for companies that shared threat data. Its expiration removes that incentive, increasing the likelihood that breaches will remain hidden. That silence leaves other organizations exposed, unaware that the same techniques may be used against them.

For publicly traded companies, the expiration of CISA raises difficult questions about compliance with SEC requirements. If a company chooses to conceal an attack in order to protect its valuation, it undermines not only investors but also the broader market. Accurate risk information is essential for functioning markets, and cyber risk is now as material as financial risk.

Without consistent reporting, the SEC will be left chasing shadows, reacting only after significant damage is done. This undermines both regulatory oversight and investor confidence.

Internationally, the expiration of CISA threatens existing information-sharing agreements. Allies who rely on the U.S. for intelligence will find the pipeline less reliable. In the realm of cybersecurity, delays of even hours can magnify the impact of an attack. Trust, once broken, is difficult to rebuild.

The need for real-time intelligence sharing is illustrated by the rapid evolution of cyber threats. Social engineering scams, such as extortion emails claiming to have compromising footage of victims, proliferate in part because victims lack timely warnings. Fake antivirus campaigns exploit fear and confusion to spread malware. Critical Microsoft CVE vulnerabilities can be weaponized almost immediately after discovery.

In an environment without structured information sharing, each victim learns in isolation, and attackers repeat their successes without interruption.

Even with CISA in place, it is unrealistic to expect government alone to protect private industry. Federal agencies have limited resources and different priorities, focused primarily on critical infrastructure and national defense. Small and medium-sized enterprises cannot rely on Washington to safeguard their networks.

Instead, they must adopt proactive measures such as zero-trust architecture, which assumes compromise is inevitable and verifies every access request. They can achieve this by assuming responsibility for their own endpoint protection. By reducing reliance on trust and implementing rigorous controls, organizations can contain breaches before they spread.

The expiration of CISA 2015 risks returning the United States to a dangerous status quo: fragmented defenses, concealed breaches, and adversaries with the upper hand. Renewal of the act is essential, but renewal must be accompanied by a broader recognition that cybersecurity is a shared responsibility.

Companies must accept their duty to disclose, cooperate, and strengthen defenses. Regulators must reinforce accountability. And smaller entities must implement security frameworks that assume the government will not be there to intervene.

Cybersecurity is not only a technical issue but a matter of trust — in markets, in governance, and in global cooperation. Allowing CISA to expire would erode that trust, leaving the digital ecosystem weaker at a moment when threats are growing stronger.

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy PJ Media’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!