By Richard Thompson

As cyber threats continue to evolve at breakneck speed, organizations face an uncomfortable reality: their security budgets aren’t keeping pace. Security teams are increasingly tasked with doing more with less, creating a widening gap between the scale of cyber risks and the resources available to defend against them.


The Escalating Threat Landscape

From ransomware and phishing attacks to sophisticated supply-chain intrusions, the frequency and complexity of cyberattacks have surged in recent years. Analysts report that threat actors are leveraging AI, automation, and global networks of compromised systems to launch attacks with unprecedented speed and scale. According to recent studies, the average cost of a major breach continues to climb, while the number of attack vectors that organizations must monitor multiplies. This dynamic has placed enormous pressure on security teams, forcing them to prioritize and triage risk like never before.


Budget Constraints: A Persistent Challenge

Despite escalating threats, many organizations operate with fixed or only modestly increasing cybersecurity budgets. Competing priorities, economic pressures, and legacy procurement processes often limit how much can be invested in defensive infrastructure.

The result? Security teams must maximize the effectiveness of existing tools, personnel, and policies, often stretching thin in areas such as:

• Threat detection and monitoring
• Endpoint and cloud security
• Incident response readiness
• Compliance and regulatory reporting
This tension has sparked a growing debate about how organizations can balance risk with affordability, particularly as cyberattacks become more sophisticated and costly.


Strategies for Doing More With Less

Security leaders are adopting innovative approaches to stretch limited budgets without compromising protection. Some strategies include:

1. Risk-Based Prioritization
Not all assets carry the same risk. By identifying critical systems and sensitive data, teams can allocate resources to the areas most likely to be targeted or to cause the greatest operational impact.

2. Automation and AI
Security automation can reduce the burden on human analysts, handling repetitive tasks like log monitoring, threat detection, and vulnerability scanning. AI-driven tools can also predict patterns of attack and flag anomalies faster than manual methods.

3. Consolidation and Optimization
Organizations are increasingly consolidating multiple security tools into unified platforms. This approach reduces overlap, lowers licensing costs, and simplifies management.

4. Managed Security Services
Outsourcing aspects of cybersecurity to third-party providers can provide access to expertise and technology that might otherwise be cost-prohibitive, while maintaining around-the-clock coverage.

5. Continuous Training and Awareness
Even with limited budgets, human factors remain critical. Investing in staff training and end-user awareness programs can prevent attacks that technology alone may not stop, such as social engineering and phishing.


Looking Ahead
Industry experts warn that the gap between cyber threats and organizational budgets is unlikely to narrow in the near term. Organizations that fail to innovate may find themselves exposed to increasingly severe risks.

At the same time, companies that embrace strategic prioritization, automation, and intelligent resource allocation can protect critical assets and maintain operational resilience—even in the face of constrained budgets.

The challenge is clear: in a world of escalating cyber threats, security teams must achieve more with less—not by cutting corners, but by making smarter, more deliberate decisions about where and how to deploy their resources.


Bottom Line: The cybersecurity landscape demands both efficiency and vigilance. By focusing on critical risks, leveraging technology, and empowering people, organizations can balance limited budgets against expanding threats, safeguarding their operations without breaking the bank.

By Hannah Pantos

General Motors said on Thursday it would take a $6 billion charge to unwind some electric-vehicle investments, the latest car company to pull back from EVs in response to the Trump administration's policies and fading demand.

General Motors (GM.N), opens new tab said on Thursday it would take a $6 billion charge to unwind some electric-vehicle investments, the latest car company to pull back from EVs in response to the Trump administration's policies and fading demand.

The charge stems from reducing its planned EV production and the fallout on the supply chain, GM said in a regulatory filing, and comes weeks after rival Ford Motor (F.N), opens new tab announced a similar but much bigger charge.

Most of GM's writedown - a $4.2 billion cash charge - is related to contract cancellations and settlements with suppliers, who had planned for much higher production volumes before the market turned.

GM said the writedown would not affect its U.S. lineup of roughly a dozen EV models, which is the industry’s broadest offering of battery-powered vehicles. “We plan to continue to make these models available to consumers,” it said in its filing.

The company will record the charge as a special item in its fourth-quarter earnings report. It expects to incur additional charges in 2026 as a result of negotiations with its supply base, but expects them to be less than its 2025 EV charges.

Shares fell 2% in after-hours trading. They ended the regular session on Thursday up 3.9% at $85.13.

GM PLACED A BIG BET ON EVs

Many automakers, including GM’s crosstown rival, Ford, have been dialing back factory work on EVs since last summer, when U.S. President Donald Trump’s massive tax and spending package darkened the outlook for the EV market. Sales of battery-powered vehicles have cratered following the elimination on September 30 of a $7,500 federal tax credit for EV buyers.

Ford in December said it would take a $19.5 billion writedown over several quarters as it canceled several EV programs, including the fully electric version of its F-150 Lightning truck and an additional electric truck and van.

GM, the largest U.S. automaker by sales, made one of the biggest bets on EVs among global automakers, at one point vowing to essentially phase out internal-combustion cars and trucks by 2035.

While the company has not publicly walked back the 2035 goal, analysts have sharply cut the industry’s EV sales forecast into the next decade for the U.S., GM’s largest and most profitable market. GM CEO Mary Barra has said the company will respond to customer demand.

GM’s EV sales had started gaining traction in late 2024 after years of manufacturing setbacks. The company rolled out more lower-cost offerings, helping it reach No. 2 in sales behind Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab.

The company also said on Thursday that it would record a $1.1 billion charge in the fourth quarter related to its ongoing restructuring of its China joint venture.

The automaker began writing down some EV-related investments last year, including a $1.6 billion third-quarter charge. This month, GM halted production of EV batteries at two joint-venture plants for six months and cut production to one shift at an EV-only factory in Detroit.

The company also pivoted away from plans for another Michigan factory that was slated to build EVs, and instead will build the Cadillac Escalade and full-size pickups, it has said.

GM gained U.S. market share in 2025 on the strength of its gas-powered large pickups and SUVs, and its EVs, but some analysts have questioned the automaker's decision to focus on fully electric vehicles instead of hybrids.

"GM’s lack of hybrid exposure could partially reverse recent market share gains," CFRA equity analyst Garrett Nelson said in a research note on Thursday, citing the surging popularity of hybrid vehicles.

EV SALES ARE DOWN INDUSTRYWIDE

GM’s EV sales dropped 43% in the fourth quarter after the loss of the consumer tax credit. Sales hit record highs in the previous three months, when customers rushed to buy EVs before the credit ended.

EV sales across the industry increased 1.2% in 2025 from the previous year, according to research firm Omdia, a much slower growth rate than previous years.

Automotive data provider Edmunds expects EVs to account for about 6% of overall U.S. vehicle sales in 2026, down from 7.4% in 2025.

Ford’s shift, in which it essentially killed off its entire planned second generation of EVs, resulted in a much higher charge. Ford CEO Jim Farley said it was a painful but necessary move as the market cooled.

“When the market really changed over the last couple of months, that was really the impetus for us to make the call,” Farley told Reuters in a December interview.

Ford is now setting its EV hopes on a brand-new architecture that will enable the production of affordable models, starting with a $30,000 electric pickup in 2027.