Space Operators Grapple with a Complex Web of Cybersecurity Regulations

Space operators are increasingly finding themselves entangled in a web of cybersecurity regulations. While the importance of protecting digital systems in the industry is unquestionable, internationally agreed-upon requirements do not yet exist, and long-term compliance rules remain uncertain amid the emergence of new national and regional regimes. The issue is particularly acute for the space sector due to the long development and operation timelines of its technologies. Satellite design begins three to five years before launch, and their operational lifespan in orbit can exceed 15 years. Decisions related to encryption standards, authentication, and system architecture are made early on when future regulatory requirements are still unclear.

Supply chains add another layer of risk. Choosing component manufacturers or ground infrastructure operators according to current rules might conflict with future certification demands. This could lead to costly system modifications or operational restrictions after satellites are already in orbit.

Regulators are increasingly singling out the space industry as critically important. In the EU, this is enshrined in the NIS2 directive, in Australia, in the 2018 Critical Infrastructure Security Act, and in the United States, specialized cybersecurity guidelines for the space sector are in place.

Simultaneously, operators may also fall under more general regimes, such as the UK’s NIS or Singapore’s Cybersecurity Act, applicable to satellite communications and ground stations. The regulatory environment continues to expand. In the EU, a draft of the European Space Act has been published, which proposes a unified cybersecurity regime for space activities and potentially replacing NIS2 for space operators. Additionally, other regulatory measures are being developed that could affect the industry in the coming years.

As a result, operators must simultaneously comply with existing requirements, prepare for imminent changes, and take into account future regulatory frameworks. At the same time, compliance with cybersecurity is increasingly being viewed not only as a risk mitigation measure but also as a commercial factor. For customers and investors, cybersecurity is increasingly becoming a mandatory criterion when selecting suppliers. In these circumstances, operators who proactively develop flexible and adaptable compliance systems are better prepared for further tightening of rules.