Posted by: Aubrey Felix on January 8, 2026 at 8:23 am
Created with ChatGPT
If there’s one thing 2025 made clear, it’s this: the cyber threat landscape didn’t feel dramatic when most incidents started. It felt ordinary.
An email that looked normal.
A Microsoft 365 login prompt at a bad time.
A payment request that matched a real conversation.
Looking back on the year, the biggest cybersecurity issues facing small and mid-sized businesses in Southeast Michigan weren’t driven by cutting-edge hacks or brand-new attack methods. They were driven by the same tools businesses rely on every day to get work done.
This article is a look back at the cyber threat landscape businesses actually experienced in 2025—not the scariest headlines, but the patterns that kept showing up in manufacturing and professional office environments.
Phishing Blended Seamlessly into Everyday Email
One of the biggest lessons from 2025 was how ordinary phishing has become.
Manufacturers routinely exchange drawings, schedules, and vendor documents over email. Professional offices rely on email for approvals, invoices, and client communication. Attackers are leaning more into those normal workflows, knowing that messages that fit the business context are far more likely to succeed.
According to the 2025 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) SMB Snapshot, around 60% of small-business breaches involved a human element, including social engineering, credential misuse, and other user-driven actions that often begin with deceptive emails or messages.
It’s important to note that Verizon’s “human element” category doesn’t mean phishing alone. It includes a mix of behaviors—such as responding to deceptive messages, reusing compromised credentials, or trusting what appears to be a legitimate request. In many SMB incidents, phishing-style communication was simply the first step.
One of the most common mistakes businesses made in 2025 was assuming spam filters would catch everything. In reality, a significant number of incidents involved legitimate accounts that were compromised or messages that didn’t include malicious links or attachments—just a request to reply, confirm, or take action.
This is exactly why compliance frameworks put so much emphasis on email protections, access controls, and user awareness. The goal isn’t eliminating email or expecting perfect judgment. It’s to reduce the chance that a normal interaction turns into a business disruption.
What this meant for businesses in 2025:
Email remained one of the most common starting points for incidents.
Microsoft 365 Logins Became a Frequent Target
Another pattern that continued in 2025 was how often attackers focused on account access rather than devices or malware.
This wasn’t a new tactic, but it showed up more consistently than many businesses expected. For many businesses, Microsoft 365 is the center of daily work. They use it for email, files, calendars, approvals, and collaboration. That makes user accounts a high-value target, especially once attackers obtain stolen credentials through phishing, data leaks, or reused passwords.
Microsoft’s 2025 Digital Defense Report reinforces this trend, noting that identity-based attacks now account a significant amount of cloud-related security incidents, particularly in Microsoft 365 environments.
While multi-factor authentication (MFA) remains one of the most effective controls available, 2025 showed that attackers increasingly relied on identity-focused techniques, including methods such as MFA fatigue, rather than trying to bypass MFA technically.
A common mistake SMBs made was assuming that enabling MFA alone fully solved the problem. That’s why most major compliance frameworks emphasize access controls and monitoring because they assume credentials will be targeted at some point. And without additional guardrails like conditional access rules, login alerts, or restrictions on where and how accounts can be used, stolen credentials still led to real business impact.
What this meant for businesses in 2025:
Account security proved to be just as critical as endpoint security, especially in cloud-first environments.
Ransomware Was About Downtime, Not Drama
Ransomware wasn’t new in 2025, but the way it affected businesses felt more operational than dramatic.
In many cases, ransomware was the final stage of a longer intrusion. Attackers gained access through stolen credentials, spent time understanding the environment, and only deployed encryption once they identified the systems that would cause the most disruption.
For manufacturers, that could mean halted production or missed shipping deadlines. For professional offices, it often meant losing access to documents, billing systems, or client records at critical moments.
The data shows some encouraging progress. According to Sophos’ State of Ransomware 2025 report, recovery times improved compared to previous years, with just over half of organizations fully recovering within a week of a ransomware incident. That’s a meaningful improvement and a sign that better backups and response planning are making a difference.
At the same time, that data highlights an important reality for small and mid-sized businesses: even a “good” ransomware outcome can still be costly. A week of downtime can mean lost revenue, delayed orders, overtime costs, missed deadlines, and strained customer relationships. Especially for lean teams where every day matters.
One common issue we continued to see in 2025 was treating ransomware as a purely technical problem. When backups hadn’t been tested or access permissions were overly broad, recovery involved far more than restoring files.
What this meant for businesses in 2025:
Even as recovery times improved, the real cost of ransomware often showed up in lost productivity and operational disruption—not just ransom demands.
Business Email Compromise Quietly Caused Financial Loss
Some of the most expensive incidents businesses dealt with in 2025 didn’t involve malware at all.
Business Email Compromise (BEC) attacks relied on quietly monitoring email conversations and stepping in at the right moment. These often involved changing payment instructions, redirecting invoices, or impersonating trusted vendors. These attacks didn’t draw attention because they didn’t break systems. They blended into normal business communication.
While the Verizon DBIR categorizes these incidents under social engineering and misuse rather than malware, what stood out in 2025 was how consistently these scenarios showed up in real-world environments. The mechanics weren’t new, but the timing and realism made them harder to spot.
For manufacturers and professional offices in Southeast Michigan, these incidents were particularly disruptive because they mirrored real payment workflows and long-standing vendor relationships. By the time something looked “off,” money had often already moved.
The most common mistake businesses made was approving financial changes based solely on email. Processes that worked for years quietly became a point of failure once attackers understood who approved payments, when approvals typically happened, and how messages were worded.
Compliance frameworks like CIS and NIST address this risk through verification procedures and separation of duties—not because email is unsafe, but because trust alone is no longer enough when money is involved.
What this meant for businesses in 2025:
Email-based trust carried real financial risk when changes weren’t independently verified, even in otherwise well-run organizations.
AI Didn’t Create New Threats—It Refined Old Ones
Artificial intelligence didn’t introduce an entirely new category of threats in 2025. What changed wasn’t the tactic itself, but how polished and scalable it became.
Attackers used AI tools to clean up phishing emails, generate realistic invoices, and even clone voices for voicemail scams. The result was fewer obvious red flags and messages that felt more believable.
While the Verizon DBIR SMB Snapshot does not break out AI-specific attacks as a standalone category, Microsoft’s threat-intelligence reporting confirms a noticeable increase in AI-assisted social engineering, particularly targeting smaller organizations.
The mistake some businesses made was assuming these attacks were rare or experimental. In reality, attackers adopted these tools because they lowered effort and improved success rates.
What this meant for businesses in 2025:
Strong processes consistently proved more reliable than instinct alone.
What Stood Out To Us Most in 2025
Looking back, a few things stood out more than expected:
-
How infrequently incidents relied on advanced hacking tools
-
How often identity and email—not devices—were at the root of incidents
-
How small process changes prevented large financial or operational issues
-
How compliance-aligned businesses recovered faster, even if they weren’t “perfect”
The biggest surprise wasn’t how sophisticated attacks became. It was how often simple, everyday actions made the difference.
What 2025 Ultimately Taught Us
The cyber threat landscape in 2025 showed that most incidents didn’t come from reckless behavior. They came from normal business activity.
Security worked best when it was better aligned with business operations instead of becoming an obstacle. Businesses that focused on consistency weren’t chasing every new threat.
Many Southeast Michigan businesses worked with trusted local IT partners like TAZ Networks to help prioritize those efforts without overcomplicating things.
The goal isn’t to eliminate risk entirely. It’s to understand your cyber threat landscape—and how it actually shows up in your business—well enough that security supports operations instead of slowing them down. If you haven’t reviewed your cybersecurity posture recently, now is a good time to take a fresh look.