![\"Retail](\"https:\/\/dmsretail.com\/RetailNews\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/RETAIL-ONLINE-TRAINING-728-X-90.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Cyber attacks on connected refrigeration systems have exposed how quickly a digital breach can become a food safety, availability and business continuity crisis. Experts from across the sector examine the lessons for UK supermarkets and their suppliers.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n UK food suppliers have been caught up in a wave of cyber attacks targeting commercial refrigeration systems across Europe, raising fresh questions about the resilience of the cold chain. Hackers have remotely changed fridge and freezer settings, including forcing equipment into defrost mode, turning an apparently routine piece of operational technology into a direct threat to stock, safety and service.<\/p>\n London fruit and vegetable wholesaler Langridge Organic said six of its 10 refrigeration units were compromised, with staff intervening after settings were altered. The Association of Independent Meat Suppliers also confirmed that several members had been affected. One supplier reportedly saw temperature settings raised to 100C, while two others found equipment entering defrost mode. No meat was lost because the units were empty.<\/p>\n The National Cyber Security Centre said it was working with affected UK businesses after vulnerable technology was exploited. These incidents underline that refrigeration can no longer be treated solely as a facilities issue. The systems that keep food viable are increasingly connected, remotely managed and dependent on suppliers\u2014and their failure can move within minutes from the network to the shop floor.<\/p>\n The first priority is visibility. Retailers need an accurate inventory of every connected operational system across stores, depots and supplier sites: refrigeration controllers, monitoring platforms, alarm systems, remote-access tools and the software components beneath them. This should include who owns each asset, who can log in, whether it is exposed to the internet and when it was last patched or tested.<\/p>\n Richard Ford, CTO at Integrity360, warned that equipment may be remotely managed by third parties, run outdated software or rely on access arrangements that receive less scrutiny than corporate IT.<\/p>\n While, Darren Anstee, CTO for security at NETSCOUT, said connected appliances create a threat surface outside the normal security perimeter and are often missed by vulnerability and patch-management programmes.<\/p>\n That makes routine controls critical: remove unnecessary internet exposure, replace default or weak passwords, enforce tightly governed remote access, segment operational technology from corporate networks and prioritise updates according to business and safety risk.<\/p>\n Ed Rowley, solutions engineer at HackerOne, stressed each component should be treated as a potential entry point and tested regularly rather than through a one-off exercise.<\/p>\n Retailers should also assume that the monitoring layer may be compromised. Reports that alarm systems were disabled before settings were changed show why an alert dashboard cannot be the only source of truth. Stores and distribution centres need documented manual checks for temperature, equipment status and product condition, with greater scrutiny when systems behave unexpectedly or communications are lost.<\/p>\n Robin Blandford, senior vice-president of product at EcoOnline, stated that the trigger for action should be the risk to customers even while the cause remains unconfirmed. Retailers should decide in advance who can pull products, disconnect equipment, close part of a store or switch to alternative cold storage. Those escalation points should be agreed across food safety, operations, facilities, IT, security and communications\u2014not improvised during an incident.<\/p>\n Business continuity plans must account for refrigeration becoming unavailable or untrustworthy across one site\u2014or several at once. Exercises should test how teams isolate affected systems, verify product safety, move stock, source temporary capacity, protect deliveries and maintain customer communications. Daryl Flack, partner at Avella Security, added that the issue becomes one of business continuity as soon as fridges and freezers stop operating as expected, bringing stock losses, food safety decisions, customer disruption and financial impact.<\/p>\n Retailers should extend those exercises beyond their own estate. Refrigeration vendors, maintenance providers, logistics partners and food suppliers can all hold privileged access or operate critical systems. Contracts should define minimum security standards, patching responsibilities, access control, incident notification and recovery expectations. Access should be time-limited where possible and removed promptly when no longer required.<\/p>\n The financial consequences may not end with spoiled stock or lost trading. Chloe Derrick, partner in the policyholder disputes team at Stewarts, warned that attacks causing physical damage or business interruption can expose gaps between cyber and traditional property insurance. Retailers should review how policies define the cause of loss, physical damage, cyber exclusions, business interruption and hostile acts\u2014and confirm what evidence must be retained after an incident.<\/p>\n The fridge hacks are a warning about a much wider class of exposure. As supermarkets connect more equipment to improve efficiency and centralise control, the boundary between cyber security, food safety and operational resilience is disappearing. Guy Waizel, tech evangelist at Cato Networks, said coordinated disruption across multiple sites could escalate from a problem for individual businesses into a food security and national security concern.<\/p>\n The central question is no longer whether a connected freezer looks important enough to attract an attacker. It is whether the business knows where its critical dependencies sit, can detect unauthorised changes and can continue trading safely when those systems fail. The retailers best placed to withstand the next incident will be those that treat cold-chain technology as critical infrastructure\u2014and practise the response before the temperature starts to rise.<\/p>\nMap the hidden technology estate<\/h2>\n
Do not rely on automated alarms alone<\/h2>\n
Test the cold-chain continuity plan<\/h2>\n
Plan for losses\u2014and the insurance argument<\/h2>\n
A board-level supply chain risk<\/h2>\n