[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$feCKNCZ4GqytK9QRA-gr4_v3XzeMG_0z7FvEuz72BaIM":3},{"lesson":4},{"id":5,"slug":6,"article_id":7,"title":8,"body":9,"prevention":10,"framework_refs":11,"status":20,"created_at":21,"published_at":22,"article":23,"tags":27,"podcasts":40},"b0d5ec79-5f2d-4709-a4d0-67c7985c9600","dhs-rebuilds-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity-council-after-cipac-disbandment","ec157ff2-b75b-4285-8be6-cd9c5d454b3a","DHS Rebuilds Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Council After CIPAC Disbandment","The disbandment of CIPAC and the subsequent need to create ANCHOR-CI highlights the critical risk of allowing formal government-private sector cybersecurity coordination mechanisms to lapse. Gaps in structured information sharing leave critical infrastructure operators without timely threat intelligence and coordinated response frameworks, increasing national exposure to sophisticated attacks. The exemption of key meetings from public transparency laws raises governance concerns but reflects the sensitive nature of threat discussions involving operational infrastructure. Continuity of public-private partnership programs is itself a security control — when these channels break down, vulnerabilities and emerging threats may go unaddressed longer than acceptable.","**Immediate actions:**\n- Establish interim information-sharing channels (e.g., ISACs, direct agency liaisons) to bridge any gaps between dissolved and newly formed advisory councils.\n- Document and inventory all existing government-private sector cybersecurity agreements to ensure no critical coordination mechanisms are silently abandoned.\n\n**Long-term improvements:**\n- Codify critical infrastructure cybersecurity partnership programs in legislation or formal regulation to prevent dissolution through administrative or political decisions.\n- Develop a continuity-of-coordination plan that defines fallback procedures whenever a primary information-sharing body is restructured or disbanded.\n- Require regular, structured threat-briefing cycles between government agencies and critical infrastructure sector leads regardless of council status.\n\n**Detection & Governance measures:**\n- Implement accountability metrics for public-private cybersecurity councils, including participation rates, threat advisories issued, and response times to reported vulnerabilities.\n- Mandate periodic independent reviews of ANCHOR-CI effectiveness to ensure the program delivers measurable improvements in critical infrastructure resilience.",[12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19],"NIST CSF 2.0 GV.OC (Organizational Context — Understanding dependencies and stakeholders)","NIST SP 800-181 (Workforce Framework for Cybersecurity)","NIST SP 800-34 (Contingency Planning Guide)","CIS Control 17 (Incident Response Management)","CISA Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs)","Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21) — Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience","NIST CSF ID.GV-2 (Cybersecurity roles and responsibilities are coordinated and aligned with internal and external stakeholders)","ITIL Service Continuity Management","published","2026-06-30T16:20:56.073577+00:00","2026-06-30T16:20:55.709+00:00",{"id":7,"url":24,"slug":25,"title":26},"https:\u002F\u002Fcyberscoop.com\u002Fdhs-anchor-ci-cybersecurity-information-sharing\u002F","dhs-to-unveil-replacement-council-for-critical-infrastructure-cybersecurity-f771fa","DHS to unveil replacement council for critical infrastructure cybersecurity",[28,34],{"id":29,"name":30,"slug":31,"description":32,"color":33},"182e11d5-57c4-444e-8ec8-4682ad60261b","Incident Response","incident-response","Slow detection, poor containment, missing playbooks","#14b8a6",{"id":35,"name":36,"slug":37,"description":38,"color":39},"c0dcc566-3654-4d70-8ede-262a198e732f","Regulatory Compliance","regulatory-compliance","GDPR, NIS2, DORA, sector-specific violations","#ec4899",[]]