Every time a major cybersecurity incident makes headlines, we hear the same terminology:

• “Company X suffered a breach affecting 10 million users.”
• “A security incident exposed sensitive employee data.”
• “An unauthorized intrusion was detected in our network.”

What’s missing? Accountability. Intent. Malice.

These aren’t passive breaches or accidental leaks, they are deliberate, targeted attacks by bad actors with specific goals:

☠️ Financial theft

☠️ Corporate Espionage

☠️ Disgruntled Insiders

☠️ Nation-State Actors

By calling them “breaches” instead of “attacks”, we downplay their severity and shift focus away from the attackers. It’s time we change the way we talk about cybersecurity.

Breach vs. Attack: Why Language Matters

A breach sounds like a door left open, an unfortunate event where someone stumbled in.
An attack makes it clear: Someone actively broke in with bad intentions.

Example 1: Corporate Espionage Disguised as a “Breach”

A competitor infiltrates a pharmaceutical company, stealing trade secrets about a new cancer drug. The headlines read:

• ❌ “Company X Reports Data Breach Impacting Research Files.”
• ✅ What it should say: “Competitor Launches Cyber Attack, Trade Secrets Stolen in Espionage Operation.”

Why does this matter? Because framing it as a breach makes it seem like a random incident. In reality, it was deliberate, targeted intellectual property theft.

Example 2: A Disgruntled Former Employee Gets Revenge

A former IT administrator at a financial services firm still has access to internal systems. After being fired, they delete critical customer records and sell private data on the dark web.

• ❌ “Company X Suffers Data Breach Affecting Customers.”
• ✅ What it should say: “Former Employee Attacks Company, Deletes Records in Retaliation.”

Internal threats are just as dangerous as external ones, but calling them a “breach” ignores the deliberate intent behind the damage.

Example 3: Ransomware Attacks on Critical Infrastructure

A ransomware gang shuts down a major hospital system, forcing patient records offline and delaying critical surgeries. The news reports:

• ❌ “Healthcare Provider Suffers Data Breach—Patient Info at Risk.”
• ✅ What it should say: “Cybercriminals Launch Coordinated Attack on Hospital Network—Lives Put at Risk.”

This wasn’t just a breach of data. It was an attack on human lives and public safety.

How CIOs Should Lead the Change

I. Call It What It Is

• When discussing security incidents internally or in press releases, use stronger, more accurate language.
• Instead of: “We experienced a breach.”
  • Say: “Our organization was targeted in a cyberattack.”

II. Prepare for Insider Threats & Corporate Espionage

• Audit & revoke access immediately when employees leave the company.
• Monitor unusual employee activity—data exfiltration often happens before a resignation.
• Track login behavior—especially for privileged users with access to sensitive systems.

III. Push for More Aggressive Defense Strategies

• Treat every security event as a deliberate attack—not an IT failure.
• Build threat intelligence programs to detect espionage-level threats earlier.

IV. Educate the C-Suite & Board

CEOs and board members must understand that cyber threats are acts of aggression, not passive failures of IT systems.

Reframe cybersecurity discussions:

• ❌ Not: “We need better data protection.”
• ✅ Instead: “We are in an active cyber war, and our company is a target.”

Final Thoughts: Rewriting the Cybersecurity Narrative

Attackers are evolving. It’s time for our language to evolve too.

✔ A “breach” is an accident. An attack is intentional.
✔ A “security incident” is vague. A cyber war is happening every day.
✔ Words shape how organizations respond and how seriously the world takes these threats.

CIOs, IT leaders, and security teams must lead the charge in changing how we talk about cybersecurity. Because the stakes are higher than ever.