SAN FRANCISCO (WHN) – The cybersecurity industry often grapples with a fundamental paradox: organizations operate in a state of perpetual potential compromise, a “pre-breach” condition where threats lurk unseen, much like Schrödinger’s cat exists in a superposition of alive and dead until observed.
This analogy, while imperfect, highlights a critical gap in how many businesses approach security. Steven Connolly, writing for ESET UK on December 11, 2025, points out that attackers exploit this lack of internal visibility. They can move through systems for extended periods, a tactic exemplified by the Scattered Spider group’s involvement in the Marks and Spencer (M&S) and the multi-billion pound Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) breaches. The timing of these attacks – deliberately chosen for maximum disruption, as seen with the JLR incident on the eve of new car registration day – underscores that these aren’t random quantum events, but calculated maneuvers.
The reality for most organizations is a long dwell time. IBM’s Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025 noted that the global mean time to identify and contain a breach spans a staggering 241 days, with identification alone taking 181 days. This extended period means the damage is often substantial by the time it’s discovered.
Traditional security upgrades, often framed as “buying a bigger lock,” fall short. They fail to account for sophisticated social engineering or insider threats, where credentials can be compromised through phishing or other deceptive means. The attackers, as Connolly illustrates, are adept at stealing the keys, rendering even the most fortified digital doors useless.
The next logical step for many is establishing a Security Operations Center (SOC), a dedicated unit staffed with analysts to monitor systems. However, this path is fraught with challenges. The upfront cost and time investment—months of setup and hundreds of thousands of dollars—are significant. Furthermore, the widely reported cybersecurity skills shortage makes recruiting and retaining qualified personnel a persistent hurdle.
Even if an organization manages to build a SOC and deploy advanced tools like EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) or XDR (Extended Detection and Response), the sheer volume of telemetry, alerts, and alarms can be overwhelming. Many organizations, struggling to process the deluge of data, end up disabling critical monitoring functions, creating a false sense of security. They believe they are observing their systems, thus resolving the “quantum breach state,” but lack the expertise to interpret the findings correctly, leaving them vulnerable.
This predicament is exacerbated by the insurance industry. Increasingly, cyber insurance policies mandate the deployment of EDR solutions as a prerequisite for coverage. This forces security professionals into a bind: they must adopt tools that require specialized skills, without necessarily having the in-house capability to operate them effectively, jeopardizing their insurance in the event of a breach.
The stress associated with managing these complex security environments is palpable within cybersecurity teams globally. Yet, a third option is emerging, offering a way out of this dilemma. Vendors are increasingly offering Managed Detection and Response (MDR) services. These services leverage the expertise of specialized teams to manage and operate security tools around the clock.
MDR providers focus on proactive threat hunting, rapid detection, and swift remediation. For organizations, this translates to a de-stressed operational environment. It effectively resolves the “quantum breach state” by ensuring continuous, expert observation and response. This approach not only helps meet stringent insurance and compliance requirements but, crucially, mitigates the potential damage caused by advanced persistent threats (APTs) and long-dwelling cybercrime groups.
The shift towards MDR signifies a pragmatic recognition that effective cybersecurity isn’t just about deploying technology, but about ensuring that technology is expertly managed and utilized. It’s about moving beyond the theoretical superposition of “breached or not breached” to a state of informed, active defense.