Business
The true cost of cyber hacking on businesses
Theo LeggettInternational Business Correspondent
BBCThe first day of September should have marked the beginning of one of the busiest periods of the year for Jaguar Land Rover.
It was a Monday, and the release of new 75 series number plates was expected to produce a surge in demand from eager car buyers. At factories in Solihull and Halewood, as well as at its engine plant in Wolverhampton, staff were expecting to be working flat out.
Instead, when the early shift arrived, they were sent home. The production lines have remained idle ever since.
Though they are expected to resume operations in the coming days, it will be in a slow and carefully controlled manner. It could be another month before output returns to normal. Such was the impact of a major cyber attack that hit JLR at the end of August.
It is working with various cyber security specialists and police to investigate, but the financial damage has already been done. Over a month’s worth of worldwide production was lost.
Analysts have estimated its losses at £50m per week.
Getty ImagesFor a company that made a £2.5bn profit in the last financial year, and which is owned by the Indian giant Tata Group, the losses should be painful but not fatal. But JLR is not an isolated incident.
So far this year there has been a wave of cyber attacks targeting big businesses, including retailers such as Marks & Spencer and the Co-op, as well as a key airport systems provider. Other high profile victims have included the children’s nursery chain Kido, while last year incidents involving Southern Water and a company that provided essential blood tests to the NHS raised serious concerns about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure and services.
In all, a government run survey on cyber security breaches estimates 612,000 businesses and 61,000 charities were targeted across the UK. So just how much are attacks like these costing businesses and the economy?
And could it be, as one expert analyst puts it, that this year’s major attacks are the result of a “cumulative effect of a kind of inaction” on cyber security from the government and businesses that is now starting to bite?
Pyramid of suppliers affected
What is significant about an attack on the scale of the one that hit JLR is just how far the consequences can stretch.
The company sits at the top of a pyramid of suppliers, thousands of them. They range from major multinationals, such as Bosch, down to small firms with a handful of employees, and they include companies which are heavily reliant on a single customer: JLR.
For many of those firms, the shutdown represented a very real threat to their business.
In a letter to the Chancellor on 25 September, the Business and Trade Committee warned that smaller firms “may have at best a week of cashflow left to support themselves”, while larger companies “may begin to seriously struggle within a fortnight”.
Industry analysts expressed concerns that if companies started to go bankrupt, a trickle could soon become a flood – potentially causing permanent damage to the country’s advanced engineering industry.
Resuming production does not automatically mean the crisis is over either.
“It has come too late,” explains David Roberts, who is the Chairman of Coventry-based Evtec, a direct supplier to JLR, with some 1,250 employees.
“All of our companies have had six weeks of zero sales, but all the costs. The sector still desperately needs cash.”
From Co-op to Marks & Spencer
A recent IBM report, which looked at data breaches experienced by about 600 organisations worldwide found that the average cost was $4.4m (or £3.3m).
But JLR is far from an outlier when it comes to high-profile cyber attacks on an even greater scale. Marks & Spencer and the Co-op supermarket chain this year are estimated to have cost £300 million and £120 million respectively.
Over the Easter weekend in April, attackers managed to gain entry to Marks & Spencer’s IT systems via a third-party contractor, forcing it to take some networks offline.
Initially, the disruption seemed relatively minor – with contactless payment systems out of action, and customers unable to use its ‘click and collect’ service. However, within days, it had halted all online shopping – which normally makes up around a third of its business.
It was described at the time as “almost like cutting off one of your limbs”, by Nayna McIntosh, former executive committee member of M&S and the founder of Hope Fashion.
Bloomberg via Getty ImagesWhen the Co-op supermarket chain was hit, the same group of hackers claimed responsibility.
It was, they suggested, an attempt to extort a ransom from the company by infecting its networks with malicious software. However the IT networks were shut down quickly enough to avoid significant damage.
As the criminals angrily described it to the BBC, “they yanked their own plug – tanking sales, burning logistics, and torching shareholder value”.
According to Jamie MacColl, a cyber expert at the security research group, the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), it is no surprise to see major businesses being targeted in this way.
He says it is the result of hackers being easily able to get hold of so-called ransomware (software which can lock up or encrypt a victim’s computer networks until a ransom is paid).
“Historically, this kind of cyber crime… has mostly been carried out by Russian-speaking criminals, based in Russia or other parts of the former Soviet Union”, he explains.
“But there’s been a bit of a change in the last couple of years where English-speaking, mostly teenage hackers have been leasing or renting ransomware from those Russian-speaking cyber criminals, and then using it to disrupt and extort from the businesses they’ve gained access to.
“And those English-speaking criminals do tend to focus on quite high-profile victims, because they’re not just financially motivated: they want to demonstrate their skill and get kudos within this quite nasty sort of hacking ecosystem that we have.”
Weak spots of big business
What makes companies like Jaguar Land Rover and Marks & Spencer particularly vulnerable is the way in which their supply chains work.
Carmakers have a long tradition of using so-called “just-in-time delivery”, where parts are not held in stock but delivered from suppliers exactly where and when they are needed.
This cuts down on storage and waste costs. But it also requires intricate coordination of every aspect of the supply chain, and if the computers break down, the disruption can be dramatic.
Likewise, a retailer like Marks & Spencer relies on a carefully coordinated supply chain to guarantee customers the right quantities of fresh produce in the right places – which similarly proves vulnerable.
Reuters“Other industries have this model too: electronics and high-tech, because it’s expensive and risky to hold inventory for a long time due to obsolescence. And then other industrial firms, such as in aerospace, for similar reasons to automotive,” explains Elizabeth Rust, lead economist at Oxford Economics.
“So they’re a bit more vulnerable to supply chain disruption from a cyber attack.”
But she points out this is not the case for industries such as pharmaceuticals, where regulators require firms to hold minimum levels of stock.
Rethinking lean production
Andy Palmer, a former chief executive of Aston Martin who has spent decades working in the manufacturing sector, thinks the lean production models in the car and food industries need a rethink.
It is a major risk, he says, when you have “these systems where everything is tied to everything else, where the waste is taken out of every stage… but you break one link in that chain and you have no safety.
“The manufacturing sector has to have another look at the way it tackles this latest black swan”, he says, referring to an event that is unforeseen but which has significant consequences.
But according to Ms Rust, businesses are unlikely to change the way their supply chains operate.
“Cyber attacks are really expensive… but shifting away from just-in-time management is potentially even more expensive. This is hundreds of millions, possibly, that a firm would have to incur annually”.
She believes the costs would also make it a steep challenge for regulators to demand such changes.
‘The cumulative effect of inaction’
In late September a ransomware attack on American aviation technology firm Collins Aerospace caused serious problems at a number of European airports, including London Heathrow, after it disabled check-in and baggage handling systems.
The problem was resolved relatively quickly, but not before a large number of flights had been cancelled.
Industry sources warn that Europe’s airspace and key airports are so heavily congested that disruption in one area can quickly spread to others – and the costs can quickly add up.
In this instance, the knock-on effects were largely confined to widespread delays and flight cancellations. But it nods to a bigger question of what happens if a hack on critical infrastructure paralyses financial, transport or energy networks, potentially leading to huge economic costs – or worse?
AFP via Getty Images“I think the worst-case scenario is probably something affecting financial services or energy provision, because of the potential cascading effects of either of those two”, says RUSI analyst Jamie MacColl.
“The good news is the financial sector is by far the most heavily-regulated sector in the UK for cyber security. And I think it’s quite telling, there’s rarely been a very impactful cyber attack on a Western bank.”
The outlook, were there an attack on the energy sector, is not clear.
A 2015 study by Lloyds Bank, entitled “Business Blackout”, modelled the impact of a hypothetical attack on the US power grid, concluding that economic losses could exceed $1 trillion (£742bn). However Mr MacColl believes that in the UK, there is probably enough spare capacity in the grid to deal with a cyber incident.
More concerningly, Mr MacColl thinks the UK has had “quite a laissez-faire approach to cyber security over the past 15 years”, with the issue given little priority by successive governments.
He believes that this year’s major attacks may be the “cumulative effect of a kind of inaction on cyber security, both from the government and from businesses, and it’s sort of really starting to bite now”.
That inaction, he says, needs to change, with both regulators and large businesses taking more responsibility.
Anadolu via Getty ImagesIn July last year the government did announce plans to introduce a Cyber Security and Resilience bill but its passage to becoming law has been repeatedly delayed.
In May, GCHQ’s National Cyber Security Centre published a report warning about the growing impact of cyber threats from hackers using artificial intelligence-based tools. It suggested that over the next two years, “a growing divide will emerge between organisations that can keep pace with AI-enabled threats, and those that fall behind – exposing them to greater risk, and intensifying the overall threat to the UK’s digital infrastructure.
However, what worries Jamie MacColl most are the sorts of attacks we haven’t yet thought to protect against.
“I would be more concerned about the sort of company that is the only business that provides a particular service, but that we don’t really know about, and that isn’t regulated as critical national infrastructure”, he says.
An attack on one of these less glamourous economic pivots, he argues, could have huge ramifications through the wider economy.
“That’s the sort of thing that would keep me up at night,” he says. “The single point of failure that we are not aware of yet.”
Top image credit: PA
BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Business
Fuel Prices Pakistan: Iran war impact: Will Pakistan be forced into rationing fuel if conflict drags on? – The Times of India
Pakistan could be forced to consider fuel rationing at petrol pumps if the ongoing US-Iran conflict continues for a prolonged period, finance minister Muhammad Aurangzeb has said.Speaking at the World Bank–IMF Spring Meetings 2026 in Washington, DC, Aurangzeb indicated that while Islamabad has so far avoided rationing, the situation remains fluid and dependent on how the conflict evolves.
“So far we have stayed away from interventions at the gas stations and at the petrol pumps… from our perspective that’s a much better way to go than going into rationing,” he said, while responding to a question on whether Pakistan may impose fuel restrictions.
Govt prefers price mechanism over rationing
The minister explained that the government is currently relying on price adjustments and targeted subsidies to manage demand, rather than imposing strict supply controls.“What we’ve seen is it has led to law and order situations in other countries,” he said, referring to rationing measures elsewhere. “If demand destruction can be done through price transmission combined with targeted subsidies… that’s a much better way to go.”However, he cautioned that this approach may not hold if the crisis deepens. “I have to put an asterisk there, it all depends how long this goes and how far this goes,” he added, signalling that rationing remains a fallback option.
Oil crisis driven by Hormuz disruption
The warning comes amid heightened global energy volatility triggered by the US-Iran war, which has disrupted supplies through the Strait of Hormuz — a key route for nearly a third of global oil flows,.Pakistan, which imports around 85% of its fuel through the strait, is particularly vulnerable to supply shocks and rising prices. The country has already witnessed sharp fuel price hikes in recent weeks, sparking protests and forcing the government to roll back increases.
Rising prices, public pressure shape policy
Petrol prices in Pakistan surged by over 40% earlier this month before being partially reduced following public backlash. The spike pushed transport costs higher and triggered unrest in several regions.To cushion the impact, the government introduced targeted subsidies for transporters, farmers and other key groups, alongside relief measures such as free public transport in some areas.Aurangzeb’s remarks highlight the delicate balancing act facing Islamabad managing dwindling energy supplies while avoiding public unrest, as the Middle East conflict continues to cast a long shadow over global oil markets.
Business
India-US trade deal back in focus: Indian delegation to visit Washington next week for talks – The Times of India
India-US trade deal update: Months after India and the US announced an interim trade agreement that reduces tariffs on India to 18%, an official Indian delegation is set to travel to Washington next week for discussions with US authorities, a government source said on Wednesday.According to a PTI source, the visit is scheduled for next week. The agreement had originally been expected to be signed in March, but developments in the Donald Trump tariff regime following a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States have changed the circumstances.
In this light, the talks between trade representatives of India and the United States are seen as particularly significant. Officials had earlier indicated that the deal would be concluded only after clarity emerges on the revised tariff structure in the United States.In February, the two countries had announced that they had finalised the framework for the first phase of their bilateral trade pact. As part of this understanding, the US had agreed to bring down tariffs on Indian goods to 18 per cent.However, the tariff environment in the US shifted after the court struck down sweeping reciprocal tariffs introduced by President Donald Trump. Subsequently, the US administration imposed a uniform 10 per cent tariff on imports from all countries for a period of 150 days starting February 24.Amid these changes, a planned meeting between the chief negotiators from both sides was deferred last month. The two countries had been scheduled to meet in February to finalise the legal text of the agreement.At the time the framework was agreed, India enjoyed a relative advantage over competing nations. That edge has since narrowed, as all US trading partners are now subject to the same 10 per cent tariff.The upcoming talks will also be crucial in the context of two ongoing investigations initiated by the Office of the United States Trade Representative under Section 301.On March 12, the USTR launched a probe covering around 60 economies, including India and China. The investigation aims to assess whether policies or practices related to the enforcement of bans on goods produced using forced labour are unreasonable or discriminatory, or whether they restrict US trade.A day earlier, on March 11, the USTR had initiated another Section 301 investigation focusing on the policies and industrial practices of 16 economies, including India and China.
Business
Lidl and Iceland ads banned under new ‘less healthy’ food rules
Ads for supermarkets Lidl and Iceland have become the first to be banned under new rules governing “less healthy” food and drink.
The rules, which came into effect at the beginning of the year, are part of Government efforts to tackle childhood obesity by preventing ads for food and drink that is high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) appearing on television between 5.30am and 9pm, and online at any time.
The new ban applies to products that fall within 13 categories considered to play the most significant role in childhood obesity, including soft drinks, chocolates and sweets, pizzas and ice creams, but also breakfast cereals and porridges, sweetened bread products, and main meals and sandwiches.
Products that fall into these categories are than also assessed as to whether they are “less healthy” based on a scoring tool that considers their nutrient levels and whether products are high in saturated fat, salt or sugar.
Only products that meet both of the two criteria are included in the restrictions.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said an Instagram post for Lidl Northern Ireland by influencer Emma Kearney featured the grocer’s cheese pretzel, which was not categorised as HFSS and therefore did not fall within the restrictions, and its Pain Suisse product, which was classified as both HFSS and a sweetened bread product and was therefore banned under the new rules.
Lidl said the ad had been removed and they had liaised with their marketing agency to ensure that all future ads complied with the new rules.
In a separate case, Iceland confirmed that two ads included a tub of Swizzles Sweet Treats, a packet of Chupa Chups Laces, a bag of Chooee Disco Stix and a bag of Haribo Elf Surprises, which were all classified as HFSS.
They also provided nutrient profile information from their supplier which confirmed that Pringles Sour Cream & Onion crisps, also included in the ads, were not an HFSS product.
Iceland’s Luxury Aberdeen Angus Beef Roasting Joint, Vegetable Spring Rolls, Sticky Chicken Skewers and Lurpak Spreadable Butter, which were also included in the ads, did not fall within the new restrictions.

The ASA did not uphold a complaint against an Instagram post by influencer John Fisher – known to many as Big John – which featured him promoting menu items at a new German Doner Kebab outlet because the specific items shown in the ad were not classified as less healthy foods.
The watchdog also cleared a TV ad for On The Beach promoting free airport lounge access which featured a boy approaching a buffet and taking a chocolate ring doughnut.
The ASA said viewers would see the ad as showing an example of what was available in the lounge rather than for the doughnut itself, meaning it did not break the rules.
ASA chief executive Guy Parker said: “As the ad regulator, our role is to remain impartial and independent, making sure our new LHF rules, which reflect the law, are applied fairly and consistently.
“These initial rulings are an important step in building a clearer picture of how the rules are applied in reality.
“We’ll be continuing to play our role in administering and enforcing them, including by using tech-assisted proactive monitoring.”
An Iceland spokesman said: “The products highlighted were part of a bigger range in the specific display ad and were featured due to a technical fault with a data feed from a third-party supplier.
“As the ASA has pointed out, these initial rulings are helping to build a clearer picture of how the new rules are applied, following the initial confusion and debate around the regulations.”
-
Fashion1 week agoIndia’s exports face reset as EU links trade to carbon metrics: EY
-
Entertainment1 week agoQueen Elizabeth II emotional message for Archie, Lilibet sparks speculation
-
Tech7 days agoAs the Strait of Hormuz Reopens, Global Shipping Will Take Months to Recover
-
Entertainment1 week agoLamar Odom shocking response to Khloé Kardashian account of his overdose
-
Tech7 days agoAzure customers up in arms over ‘full’ UK South region | Computer Weekly
-
Fashion1 week agoCII submits 20-pt agenda to Indian govt to back firms hit by Iran war
-
Tech6 days agoThis AI Button Wearable From Ex-Apple Engineers Looks Like an iPod Shuffle
-
Fashion1 week agoICE cotton hits 11-month high on drought concerns, demand boost

