The unprecedented cyberattack campaign that recently hit supermarket refrigeration systems across Europe may have targeted retailers, but experts say farmers should see it as a warning shot.
The attacks affected supermarket freezers, food warehouses and supply chains across numerous European countries, demonstrating how attackers can disrupt food systems not by targeting flagship IT systems, but by compromising relatively obscure pieces of operational technology.
A warning from Europe’s frozen aisles
For a sector increasingly reliant on internet-connected machinery, precision agriculture tools, cloud software and automated infrastructure, the incident raises an uncomfortable question: if hackers can disable refrigeration systems in supermarkets in relatively unsophisticated ways, what is stopping them from targeting farms, grain stores, irrigation systems or connected tractors, particularly as geopolitical risks are unlikely to disappear anytime soon (Russian-aligned hacktivist groups initially claimed responsibility, with France and the US since officially accusing Iran of orchestrating the attacks)?
According to cybersecurity specialists interviewed by AgNavigator, very little.
“The agriculture sector is becoming increasingly vulnerable to cyber incidents as modern farms are much more connected than is sometimes appreciated, but cybersecurity hasn’t always developed at the same pace,” said Nick Baker, cyber specialist at NFU Mutual.
While attention often focuses on farm machinery, Baker argues agriculture’s greatest cyber vulnerability may actually lie elsewhere.
“For me, the biggest concern is the supply chain where agriculture businesses have no control over third-party cybersecurity, but are dependent on machinery manufacturers, feed and fertiliser suppliers, processors, hauliers, technology providers, wholesalers and retailers,” he said.
“If a major supplier or retailer is taken offline, the disruption can quickly spread to a large number of agriculture businesses.”
The supply chain challenge
While agriculture may have traditionally viewed cybersecurity as an IT issue, experts increasingly describe it as an operational risk with potentially direct consequences for food production.
Modern farms rely on a complex ecosystem of interconnected technologies. Tractors exchange data with cloud platforms. Irrigation systems can be remotely controlled. Grain stores use automated environmental monitoring systems. Livestock operations depend on connected sensors. Supply chains are coordinated through digital logistics networks.
Each connection creates efficiencies. Each connection also creates another potential entry point.
As Baker put it: “You don’t want to discover during harvest that the tractor still works, but the technology it relies on to operate, doesn’t.”
Cybersecurity isn’t keeping pace with digitalisation
Daniel dos Santos, vice president of research at cybersecurity company Forescout, says the same cyber-physical risks now threatening retailers are increasingly present across agriculture.
“The attacks on refrigeration systems across Europe show that attackers can spoil products and disrupt normal operations simply by interfering with internet-connected operational equipment,” he said.
“Agriculture is increasingly exposed to the same type of cyber-physical risk we see in food retail and other sectors.”
The threat is not theoretical. Forescout research found that around 15% of exposed programmable logic controllers (PLCs) identified in one study were being used in agricultural applications. The company has also documented attacks against greenhouse controllers, while other incidents have targeted irrigation systems.
Dos Santos argues farms often focus on individual devices when the larger problem is connectivity.
“The biggest weakness is often not one specific device, it is the connectivity between these systems, particularly with internet-exposed equipment, insecure remote access and poorly segmented networks,” he said.
For smaller operations, the challenge is compounded by limited budgets and access to specialist cybersecurity expertise.
Could cyberattacks create food shortages?
One question hanging over the industry is whether a major cyberattack could move beyond business disruption and become a food security issue.
The answer, according to experts, is yes, although not necessarily through a single incident.
Baker believes timing would be critical.
“Potentially yes, particularly if the attack hits the right part of the supply chain at the wrong time,” he said.
“As we know, agriculture is extremely time-sensitive, and if an attack stopped a major processor or affected machinery during harvest, you can’t just delay operations for a couple of weeks.”
He cautioned that regional disruption, food waste and supply chain bottlenecks are more likely outcomes than nationwide shortages, but noted that the UK government has already identified cybersecurity as a key element of food supply chain resilience.
Dos Santos draws a distinction between isolated incidents and systemic failures.
“If that is done for one or two days in a quiet period on a single farm, it is manageable,” he said.
“The same disruption during a narrow planting or harvesting window, or while perishable products are moving through cold storage and distribution, can have a greater impact.”
The greatest danger, he argues, is that multiple organisations may depend on the same vulnerable technology.
“The risk becomes systemic if many farms or other facilities use the same vulnerable equipment that is compromised at the same time.”
Old machines, new vulnerabilities
American cybersecurity expert Jonathan Braley, director of the Food and Agriculture Information Sharing and Analysis Center (Food and Ag-ISAC), believes one of agriculture’s biggest cybersecurity challenges stems from the mismatch between machinery and software lifecycles.
Agricultural equipment often remains in service for decades. The software supporting it rarely does.
“Modern farms, suppliers and manufacturers are increasingly adopting more technology,” he said.
“These new systems and tools have allowed the sector to be more efficient, but with every new piece of technology added comes a device that is going to have vulnerabilities, requiring monitoring and patching.”
Braley notes that the refrigeration attacks themselves appear to have relied less on sophisticated hacking techniques than on poor cyber hygiene.
Many affected devices were reportedly connected directly to the internet, running outdated software or unsupported operating systems. In some cases, responsibility for maintaining security may have fallen between end users and third-party installers.
The same conditions can exist throughout agriculture.
“Hardware, software and machinery all reach end-of-life at some point,” Braley said.
“The challenge with physical assets like refrigerators and food production machinery is that they often last decades, while the software supporting them lasts a fraction of that lifespan.”
The result is a landscape filled with operational technology systems that remain functional but may no longer receive security updates.
“The sentiment that companies are too small or too unimportant to be targeted by threat actors is no longer true.”
Jonathan Braley, Director, Food and Agriculture Information Sharing and Analysis Center (Food and Ag-ISAC)
Why ransomware groups don’t care how big your farm is
Historically, some agricultural businesses have assumed they are too small or insignificant to attract cybercriminals.
Experts say that assumption is increasingly dangerous.
Braley points out that many ransomware campaigns are fundamentally opportunistic. Rather than targeting specific businesses, attackers scan the internet looking for vulnerable systems.
Food and agriculture organisations are simply among the thousands of potential victims that happen to be exposed.
“Ransomware actors have been scanning the web for vulnerable, publicly exposed systems,” he said.
“The sentiment that companies are too small or too unimportant to be targeted by threat actors is no longer true.”
Artificial intelligence may further accelerate that risk.
AI tools are increasingly capable of automating vulnerability discovery, helping attackers identify exposed systems at greater scale and speed.
“As AI makes it easier to discover and exploit weaknesses across a larger number of systems, organisations may find themselves facing threats even when they are not specifically targeted,” Braley warned.
GPS theft: the physical threat hasn’t disappeared
Cybersecurity is not the only technology-linked threat confronting farmers.
The recent cyberattack concerns arrive against a backdrop of renewed warnings about agricultural GPS theft.
Following the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022, organised criminal gangs launched a sustained wave of thefts targeting precision farming equipment across the UK and Europe.
NFU Mutual recorded a 137% increase in insurance claims for stolen GPS equipment during the peak of the crime wave.
Government officials and rural crime experts raised concerns that agricultural GPS domes and display screens were being stolen to order, trafficked into Eastern Europe and potentially reconfigured for military applications, including guiding drones and weaponry.
Regardless of their final destination, organised criminals clearly recognised the value of these systems.
While claims later declined, NFU Mutual’s Rural Affairs Specialist Hannah Binns says the threat remains real.
“Rural crime is more organised than ever, with criminals prepared to go to extreme lengths,” she said.
“GPS were the hot ticket item for criminals throughout 2023, who travelled across the UK to steal these highly valuable and portable kits.”
Criminal gangs frequently targeted multiple farms in a single night before moving on to new regions.
According to Binns, intelligence gathered by police suggests GPS theft activity has begun rising again in 2026.
“Farmers must not be complacent as police intelligence suggests 2026 has seen a surge in GPS thefts once again,” she said.
Why GPS systems remain attractive targets
The appeal of agricultural GPS equipment to criminals is straightforward: it is highly valuable, portable and compatible across different machinery brands. Many units lack their own cellular connectivity, making them difficult to track once stolen, while their external placement on tractors and other equipment leaves them vulnerable to theft.
The consequences can be significant. Without GPS guidance systems, farmers can face severe operational disruption during critical fieldwork windows. During planting or harvest, losing guidance equipment can cause costly delays almost immediately.
Braley believes GPS technology will remain an attractive target, not only for thieves but also for those seeking to disrupt agricultural operations.
“Back in September 2024, we conducted a tabletop exercise examining the impacts of severe GPS outages and which technologies across the food and agriculture sector could be affected,” he said.
“Through that exercise we found that precision agriculture tools, self-driving tractors, drones, animal tags and more could be affected. We have thankfully only seen a few isolated examples of threat actors jamming or spoofing GPS in the US, but it is a much bigger issue in other parts of the world, including Ukraine.
“Should we have a more significant geopolitical conflict with another nation, we can expect GPS to be heavily impacted.”
“Farmers must not be complacent as police intelligence suggests 2026 has seen a surge in GPS thefts once again.”
Hannah Binns, Rural Affairs Specialist, NFU Mutual
Manufacturers respond
Agricultural machinery manufacturers are increasingly treating both cybersecurity and theft prevention as core product design issues.
John Deere says connectivity is now a standard feature across agricultural machinery, creating both opportunities and new responsibilities.
“Connectivity is now standard across agricultural machinery of all sizes and brands, just as it is in the automotive sector,” a company spokesperson told AgNavigator.
The company says it maintains a substantial global team focused on product and data security and continues to invest heavily in strengthening existing protections.
The manufacturer is also developing measures specifically designed to reduce GPS theft.
According to John Deere, newer systems increasingly incorporate PIN-protection technology that can render stolen receivers unusable. Farmers can also track components through the company’s Operations Center platform.
Perhaps most significantly, the company is progressively integrating guidance technology directly into machinery, eliminating removable components that have traditionally been favoured by thieves.
“As more farms adopt precision technology, high-value components such as GPS receivers and displays have become a focus for organised crime,” the spokesperson said.
“It remains an issue the whole industry takes seriously.”
