IAPH webinar highlights the convergence of cybercrime and geopolitical tensions at ports, emphasizing resilience beyond compliance.
From cybercrime to geopolitical tensions, an IAPH webinar discusses how hybrid threats are increasingly converging at ports.
The webinar on Sept 7, the fifth in a series leading up to this year’s World Ports Conference, discussed the new frontiers of port security. Patrick Verhoeven, managing director of the IAPH, highlighted how a recent survey among its members sees cybercrime as today’s most significant risk to ports, followed narrowly by geopolitical tensions.
The webinar made clear, however, that these risks, including cybercrime, cannot be viewed in isolation as threats increasingly overlap and reinforce each other. Nick Parham, Chief Officer of Maritime Cybersecurity Policy, speaking more specifically about cyber threats, argued that these threats are never 'a lone ransomware attack' but are always linked to a larger group or nation seeking a greater effect on the supply chain.
Ine Van Wymersch, the National Drug Commissioner for the Government of Belgium, brings a law enforcement perspective and a human angle to a discussion often otherwise dominated by data and surveys. Van Wymersch highlighted the vulnerability of people working in ports—how factors such as financial pressures, loneliness, and intimidation may tempt individuals to turn to organized crime.
For Van Wymersch, building resilience means looking beyond technology and infrastructure. 'A warm society is an answer to organized crime,' she argued, describing it as the only sustainable option. This thinking is reflected in efforts to build 'campaigns of resilience' designed 'to open up our ports to world trade but close them to organized crime.' These campaigns aim to tackle the human vulnerabilities that can ultimately expose wider port operations and systems to security risk.
'Let me describe what it looks like from the quayside,' Oistein Kaarbo then introduced his 'third view' as Maritime Director of the Port of Narvik. Kaarbo described the range and repercussions of hybrid threats facing ports, from digital systems and the vulnerability of subsea power to the port's fixed physicality and its dependence on a single land corridor. For Kaarbo, the concern is not necessarily destroying infrastructure but weakening people's trust in the reliability of port services.
For Narvik, resilience means preparing for this uncertainty rather than trying to eliminate every vulnerability. Kaarbo outlined several ways ports can prepare for these responsibilities. Endurance must be 'bought in advance,' through access to power, fuel, spare parts, and trained personnel, while infrastructure itself can act as a security measure. Building additional port capacity and ensuring there is more than one road or rail connection can reduce reliance on a single point of failure.
However, resilience does not mean that every port needs to build every capability itself. Kaarbo argued that ports should 'accept structured dependency' on national authorities and allied partners, recognizing that smaller ports cannot maintain capabilities such as a 24/7 security operations center independently. As Kaarbo put it, 'resilience is collective.'
This approach means looking beyond compliance. While compliance provides the baseline for port security, Kaarbo stressed it should not be seen as the endpoint: 'compliance is the floor, not the ceiling.'
These issues will be explored further at #IAPH2026, taking place in London from 3-6 November 2026. The third day of the program will focus specifically on security and resilience, under this year's theme, 'Port leadership for a brave new world.'
To find out more about #IAPH2026 and get tickets, please access this link: https://www.worldportsconference.com/event/WPC/register-now
