LINKS OF THE WEEK

My Best Finds

☁️🔐 More Local Governments Cybersecurity Links

• Cybersecurity in local governments: A systematic review and framework of key challenges (Urban Governance).

• Understanding Local Government Cybersecurity Policy: A Concept Map and Framework (Sk Tahsin Hossain et al.).

• Municipal cyber risk modeling using cryptographic computing to inform cyber policymaking (Avital Baral et al.).

• Managing cybersecurity at the grassroots:

  Evidence from the first nationwide survey of local

  government cybersecurity (Donald F. Norris et al.).

DEEP DIVE

Addressing the Cybersecurity Deficit in Local Governance

In the context of accelerating urban digitalization and the rise of smart city ecosystems, local governments have become integral to managing cyber-physical infrastructures. However, the recent study titled “Cybersecurity in local governments: A systematic review and framework of key challenges” (Urban Governance, 2025) highlights a critical deficit: local governments exhibit disproportionately weak cybersecurity postures despite increasingly complex threat landscapes​.

This newsletter unpacks the findings of this comprehensive PRISMA-based review, focusing on the technically rooted constraints, documented vulnerabilities, and proposed frameworks for improving cybersecurity across municipal and regional government structures.

Technical and Operational Realities: A Breakdown of the Core Challenges

The study analyzed 53 peer-reviewed articles to develop a robust framework of 19 cybersecurity challenges, categorized under four thematic domains. Below we focus on technical and operational, infrastructure, and human-capability constraints, drawing from empirical findings across global municipal environments.

1. Legacy Systems and Technical Debt

Many local governments rely on outdated IT systems and legacy software, exacerbated by inadequate patching, poor asset tracking, and fragmented networks. These legacy environments lack modern authentication mechanisms, exposing systems to privilege escalation, lateral movement, and denial-of-service vulnerabilities​.

Example: Ibrahim et al. (2018) applied the NIST CSF to assess a local council in Western Australia and found deficient performance across core functions:

• Identify (16%)

• Protect (45%)

• Detect (25%)

• Respond (38%)

The detection capabilities were especially weak due to the absence of tools capable of behavior-based anomaly detection or automated event correlation​.

2. Lack of Real-Time Monitoring and Detection Mechanisms

A recurring theme is the absence of centralized Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems or intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS). Only a minority of municipalities had deployed early warning systems or advanced monitoring frameworks​.

In the Polish municipal survey (Chodakowska et al., 2022), although antivirus and firewalls were common, the adoption of SIEM tools was minimal, and systematic risk assessments were often skipped due to resource shortages.

3. Cloud-Specific Security Weaknesses

While cloud computing offers scalability, Ali et al. (2020) found that in Australian local governments, operational and compliance risks outweighed technical concerns. Challenges included insufficient risk assessments, lack of data classification, and non-alignment with cloud-native security protocols (e.g., IAM, encryption at rest/in-transit)​.

The study proposes a four-dimensional model for cloud security:

• Data Safeguarding

• Comprehensive Risk Assessments

• Regulatory Compliance

• Business–Technical Alignment

This model emphasizes the necessity of aligning cloud implementations with structured governance and technical baselines.

4. AI and Advanced Detection: Potential and Absence

Although emerging literature suggests the integration of AI for dynamic threat detection, few local governments have deployed machine learning models capable of behavioral analytics, zero-day detection, or incident triage. The study recommends AI-based intrusion detection systems (IDS) and endpoint monitoring but notes their adoption remains limited due to technical skill gaps and high initial integration costs​.

Human-Centric Technical Deficiencies

5. Insufficient Cybersecurity Training and Awareness

Local governments typically lack internal red-teaming, cybersecurity drills, and role-based access control (RBAC) training for employees. In multiple U.S.-based studies (e.g., Caruson et al., 2012; Norris et al., 2018, 2021), end-user behavior—such as susceptibility to phishing and inadequate password hygiene—was identified as a primary vector for initial compromise.

Less than half of municipalities surveyed had formal training programs, and many lacked defined acceptable use policies. This lack of technical literacy among end users leads to misconfigurations, delayed patch cycles, and unsafe email and device usage.

Conceptual Framework: Structuring the Challenges

The study categorizes the 19 identified challenges into a four-pillar framework for structured technical governance:

1. Policy & Regulatory – Lack of formalized cybersecurity policies, limited compliance alignment (e.g., ISO/IEC 27001:2017–06).

2. Resource & Infrastructure – Underfunded IT systems, lack of secure-by-design infrastructure, outdated or missing IAM solutions.

3. Accountability & Behavioral – Absence of consequence management, poor incident documentation, minimal executive prioritization.

4. Technical & Operational – Limited SIEM/IDS integration, low automation, fragmented architecture, and weak endpoint security enforcement.

Figure 4 in the study provides a visual map of interdependencies between these categories, suggesting that operational gaps often stem from intertwined deficiencies in governance and technical capacity​.

Strategic Recommendations: Technically Rooted Remediation

• Centralized Asset Management: Develop dynamic inventories of hardware/software for real-time patching and risk scoring.

• Zero Trust Principles: Implement least-privilege access, MFA, and segmentation of administrative domains across systems.

• Periodic Cyber Assessments: Adopt NIST CSF-aligned evaluations to quantify risk and benchmark security maturity.

• AI-Augmented Monitoring: Where feasible, deploy lightweight anomaly detection systems using behavioral baselines.

• Open-Source Security Tools: Utilize community-driven solutions (e.g., Wazuh, Snort) for cost-effective monitoring and log analysis.

The paper also emphasizes inter-institutional collaboration—partnering with regional cybersecurity centers, academic research hubs, and consortia to access advanced analytics, shared threat intelligence, and upskilling opportunities.

Conclusion

This study surfaces a stark yet technically detailed insight: most local governments are ill-equipped for modern cybersecurity demands due to infrastructural obsolescence, policy gaps, and under-resourced operational capabilities. By aligning with structured frameworks like NIST CSF, investing in open-source tooling, and implementing Zero Trust controls, municipalities can transition from reactive security postures to proactive, resilient digital governance.

For any local government embarking on smart city initiatives, cybersecurity must no longer be peripheral—it is central to public trust and operational continuity.

That’s all for this week’s edition of CloudSec Weekly—stay vigilant and stay secure!

Before You Go

Become the Cloud Security Expert with 5 Minutes a Week

Sign up to get instant access to cloud security tactics, implementations, thoughts, and industry news delivered to your inbox.

Join for free.