The Pentagon is investigating suspected cyber attacks on refrigeration systems at US military bases, bringing fresh attention to an insurance exposure for businesses that depend on cold storage: food can spoil after a hacker changes temperature settings, even when the cooling equipment remains operational.
According to Reuters, freezer malfunctions affected at least six military commissaries in late August. US investigators are working with French authorities following separate attacks on supermarket refrigeration systems in France earlier this month. The reporting does not establish that the US and French incidents involved the same attackers or equipment.
The incidents put a concrete loss scenario in front of brokers placing coverage for food retailers and cold-storage operators. A remotely manipulated thermostat can leave a business with unsellable stock and interrupted trading, raising questions about which policy responds when cyber interference causes a physical loss.
Read more: Fires as hundreds of French supermarkets hacked – US grocers on notice
France’s cybersecurity agency, CERT-FR, has separately confirmed numerous compromises involving Danfoss AK-SM and AK-SC controllers, alongside Copeland and Dixell XWEB systems. Its alert identifies directly exposed internet management interfaces as a security concern.
Howden, in commentary on the French incidents, warned that stock losses and physical damage arising from cyber events are often outside standard placements unless those exposures have been specifically addressed. Property and cyber programs may be purchased separately, leaving exclusions and definitions that do not align.
Read more: Hackers don’t need to steal data to cause a disaster: The coverage gap brokers need to know
Insurance Business UK previously reported that Intermarché had told AFP its insurance did not cover this type of incident. David Molony, Aon’s head of cyber and financial sponsors, told Reuters he recommended specific perishable-goods coverage for retail and pharmaceutical businesses beyond standard cyber policies.
Software maintenance can also complicate claims. Paul Gooch, deputy departmental head at Tokio Marine Kiln, told Reuters outdated software alone was not usually grounds for rejection. WTW’s Emma Pleut nevertheless noted that policyholders may commit to patching deadlines, making the individual contract important.
For retail agents and brokers, that makes a specific refrigeration scenario a useful starting point for coverage discussions: if an attacker changes temperature settings overnight, what pays for the discarded stock? A separate question is whether lost income during disposal and restocking falls within the protection purchased. The scenario requires examination of the actual wording, as the presence of both property and cyber policies does not establish that cyber-triggered spoilage is insured.
Specialist products show how insurers are addressing the exposure. Canopius launched cyber-triggered spoilage coverage in May, describing protection for perishable stock rendered unsellable when cyber incidents affect temperature or other environmental controls.
Its announced coverage scenarios include spoilage without other physical damage, as well as spoilage following cyber-related damage to buildings or equipment. Brokers considering such protection need to establish availability and applicable terms for the individual account.
CERT-FR’s response guidance urged businesses to check their insurance contractual conditions before cutting internet data transmission to refrigeration service providers.
The agency recommends removing direct internet exposure, checking configurations including defrost schedules, and restoring remote access through a secure VPN or protected network. Its guidance also calls for firmware updates and changed default passwords.
Businesses must coordinate with their insurance brokers, as securing remote access needs to account for any monitoring arrangements required under the insurance contract, with refrigeration contractors involved in establishing how those functions will continue.
For accounts with older equipment, the remaining issue is whether security updates are still available. CERT-FR warns that resetting an unsupported controller will not remove the underlying vulnerability; equipment left exposed can be compromised again.
