Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand
The Government’s new Cyber Security Strategy 2026–2030 and Action Plan 2026–2027 signal a renewed push to strengthen New Zealand’s resilience to digital threats.

The Government’s recently released Cyber Security Strategy 2026-2030 (Strategy) and Cyber Security Action Plan 2026-2027 (Plan) outline a renewed effort to strengthen New Zealand’s resilience against digital threats.
While the Plan and Strategy do not provide detailed legislative or regulatory proposals, the documents signal potential changes that may be made to New Zealand’s privacy and cyber regime. With this in mind, organisations should be thinking about whether the cyber security measures they have in place are sufficient.
Why is change needed?
New Zealand society is undergoing radical technological change. Government and business are increasingly using automated technologies, and individuals are expected to use more digital tools to go about their everyday lives. However, the prevalence of technology provides an opportunity for malicious actors to target New Zealanders. We continue to see successful malware attacks resulting in significant cost to organisations.
There is a risk that New Zealand is falling behind other comparable economies in not having dedicated cyber security legislation. New Zealand is the only developed country listed in the third tier (of five tiers) in the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) Global Cybersecurity Index 2024 – this places us alongside countries like Libya and Papua New Guinea. Tier 3 represents countries that only show a “basic cyber security commitment” and are “establishing or implementing certain generally accepted cyber security measures”. In comparison, countries that we regularly compare ourselves to, like Australia and the United Kingdom, are ranked in tier 1 because they are considered by the ITU to have implemented “coordinated…government-driven actions” that commit to strong cyber security protocols.
The Government recognises there is work to be done to improve New Zealand’s position – not taking actions risks a reduction in investment from overseas companies and the willingness of other countries to share intelligence or cooperate with the Government.
Overview of the Strategy and Plan
Strategy
The Strategy sets out four key high-level objectives for the Government:
• Understand
The Government acknowledges that current cyber incident reporting is fragmented – this makes it difficult to have a clear understanding of the current threats faced. The Government proposes that the National Cyber Security Centre will establish a single cyber security reporting service to receive, respond to, and manage incidents.
• Prevent and prepare
The Government wants departments and agencies to effectively coordinate and be empowered to respond to cyber risks. This includes strengthening the mandate of the Government Chief Digital Officer to “entrench a culture of security”. The Government will also consult business and the public on a new regulatory framework to manage cyber risk for critical infrastructure (as discussed below).
• Respond
The Strategy refers to “modernising…legislative frameworks” to deal with the global nature of cyber threats – however, it does not go into detail on what this will involve. The Government also intends to work with other countries to “address jurisdictional barriers” so that law enforcement can effectively investigate incidents of cybercrime.
• Partner
The Strategy notes that coordination between government and business to understand and disrupt cyber threats must be improved. Further, New Zealand intends to continue working with international partners to defend digital networks from harm.
Plan
The Plan sets out the Government’s proposed actions in the next two years. In the main, the Plan is largely aspirational and relatively non-committal, but there some specific ideas that may be regulated for – these include:
• Introducing a civil pecuniary penalty regime to the Privacy Act 2020 to incentivise the protection of personal information from cyber threats.
Currently the Privacy Act 2020 only allows the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (OPC) to issue fines of up to $10,000 for certain privacy breaches or refer matters to the Human Rights Review Tribunal for consideration. While there is no detail on a new financial penalty, if introduced this change could significantly alter New Zealand’s privacy regime and bring us into line with like-minded jurisdictions (something the OPC has regularly lobbied for).
• Ensuring that Government insists on stringent security standards for digital procurement.
Businesses that bid for Government-related work can likely expect to have to be able to demonstrate strong cyber security protocols (e.g., being ISO 27001 certified).
• Introducing a new offence that targets people “who view, possess, or disseminate personal information when they are aware it has been illegally obtained”.
Critical Infrastructure Framework
In addition to the Strategy and Plan, the Government has released a consultation paper on how to enhance the cyber security of critical infrastructure systems (Framework). “Critical infrastructure” will encompass systems that are essential to everyday life – including the electricity grid, telco networks and financial payment systems.
The Framework notes that New Zealand is falling behind other countries in not having dedicated legislative mechanisms to protect critical infrastructure. The Framework proposes several measures to deal with this, including:
• Allowing the Government to request specific information from critical infrastructure entities. This information could include a description of an entity’s operations and key dependencies / interdependencies. A failure to provide the information would be an offence.
• Requiring critical infrastructure entities to share certain information with another critical infrastructure provider (for example, information on an entity’s projected restoration times).
• Requiring critical infrastructure entities to report cyber incidents to the Cyber Security Centre as soon as practicable (but no later than 24 hours after the incident is detected).
• Requiring critical infrastructure entities to develop, implement and maintain a risk management programme aligned with internationally recognised cyber security best practice (e.g., ISO 27001).
• Granting the (as yet undefined) responsible Minister the power to direct a critical infrastructure entity to do anything necessary to manage a cyber threat for national security reasons.
The Framework includes a range of tools that the Government could use to deal with breaches by critical infrastructure entities – these range from targeted education and a $50,000 administrative fine for “minor” breaches (such as late or incomplete provision of information) up to a criminal penalty of the greater of $5 million or 2% of annual turnover and $500,000 for directors for “major” breaches (like negligently, recklessly or knowingly failing to meet cyber security requirements).
Operators of critical infrastructure entities or affected individuals, businesses or communities have until 19 April to make a submission to the Government on the Framework.
Next steps
While it is good to see the Government engage with these issues, the announcements so far are lacking in specifics. The Government alone cannot ensure a safer cyber security environment, however, it can provide leadership on the guardrails that should be put in place to limit risk. Organisations should see the Strategy and Plan as an opportunity to consider what actions they should be taking to mitigate the threat of malicious actors. At a high-level, organisations should:
• Get the basics right – this means:
o keeping all systems and devices up to date (with automatic updates being made by default);
o deploying reputable malware protection on all servers and devices;
o enabling multi-factor authentication for all email or other business accounts that require a log-in; and
o only contracting with reputable suppliers that agree to robust security and privacy obligations.
• Protect data – this means:
o making sure data (including personal information) is kept confidential and only accessed by those employees that have genuine need to see it;
o deleting personal information when it is no longer necessary for the purpose for which it was collected (in line with the Privacy Act 2020); and
o ensuring data is regularly backed-up and stored in a separate location.
• Plan for the worst – this means:
o having an incident response plan covering what to do if a cyber security incident occurs or is suspected;
o knowing who to contact for assistance (e.g., your lawyers and insurers); and
o knowing whether to notify the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and affected individuals if there is a breach of personal information.
We will continue to follow the progress of any new cyber security proposals put forward by the Government and provide updates if proposed legislation is introduced to Parliament.
Please get in touch with our team if you have any questions or need advice on anything discussed in this article.
Services in this insight
From Hertzian waves to hyperlinks – What the BSA’s online decision means for your business
Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground
Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand
The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships
New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
IPP3A is nearly in force – What agencies need to know
OPC shifts public enquiries online – What agencies should do now
AI as a confidante? Legal privilege and the ever-increasing use of AI
New Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code – What you need to know
Building blocks of trade mark law: New Zealand approach to "use as a trade mark" now compatible with Australia
Consumer law update 2025
Open banking launches in New Zealand
Is fair something to fear? The Government announces beefed-up Fair Trading Act
Is it fair? Lessons from Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta
Open banking almost live
Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act
Product labelling changes flagged for New Zealand
Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 introduced to New Zealand
Open banking regulations released for consultation
Ten tips for buy-side M&A success
A recipe for disaster – Is caramel a copyright work?
Becoming a Globally Renowned Fintech Nation (and how regulation can light the path)
Important changes made to the Privacy Act
New Zealand may ban social media for young users
Customer and Product Data Act update – Open banking officially on the way
Tips from the trenches – Your AI policy cheat sheet
Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media
Security guidance released for emerging tech companies
Customer and Product Data Bill – Select Committee reports back
Consumer law update 2024
New Zealand’s Artist Resale Royalty is ready to go
The shape of coffee – “Moccona” vs “Vittoria”
New Zealand’s Copyright Act gets a sense of humour
WIPO’s traditional knowledge treaty is adopted
Doing business in the Middle East
AI and advertising – What producers need to know
Seven contract clauses every freelancer needs
Baby Reindeer – When truth is stranger than fiction?
Our comments on the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
Therapeutic Products Act to be repealed this year
Is End-to-End to end?
Geographical indications – Changes uncorked by the EU-NZ Fair Trade Agreement
Lawyers and Generative AI – New NZ Law Society guidance released
Facing the future – A biometrics code of practice for New Zealand?
Deepfakes and style mimicking – Should New Zealand adopt a right of publicity?
Five Eyes release the Five Principles to Secure Innovation
The copyright conundrum with generative AI
Innovate at the speed of trust – Privacy Commissioner releases new guidance on artificial intelligence tools
Political advertising on social media: sludge or copyright quagmire?
Privacy Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament
New Data Privacy Framework: Meta gets a lifeline
The long and winding road to royalties
Implications of the Supreme Court’s “new debt” approach in Mainzeal
EU gets closer to AI laws
UK Supreme Court puts Quincecare ‘duty’ back in its box
A Deep Dive into The Customer and Product Data Bill
Searching for a shield: Meta’s €1.2 billion fine and international transfers in the age of Big Data
New NZ-UK Free Trade Agreement signals tech, media and IP law changes
Ditch the fax! Tips for building a tech-savvy law firm
The Incorporated Societies Act 2022 – what you need to know for your society
Common myths about copyright online
Artificial artist, or artificial plagiarist?
Big boost to gaming
Is your product “AI powered”?
The latest on New Zealand’s Consumer Data Right
Space Law in New Zealand
You Cannot Defame the Dead or Can You? Tikanga Māori and NZ Defamation Law
Open Banking is coming – through the Consumer Data Right
Massive SEC Fines for Companies Using Text and Instant Messaging
One Act to Rule Them All
A Legal Guide to Kicking SaaS
Potential changes to the Privacy Act 2020
NZ's Social Media "Code of Practice" Launched
Are you being unfair?
Are you legal?
Power Up 2022
A new Companies Office levy is one step closer
Has Paramount Pictures gone maverick?
From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners
I'm back, baby
Retail Payment System Act 2022 now in force
Paying the price for getting privacy wrong
Can AI be an inventor?
Finfluencer Crackdown
TIN Fintech Insights Report Launch
Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'
Disclosure of personal information - how to, not don't do
The Spice May Flow, But The Copyright Doesn’t
Sound Recording Ownership (Taylor's Version)
The Lowdown (and Lockdown) on Summer Clerkships
Building Blocks of Trust
Firm News | Legal Rankings
Buy Now, Regulate Soon
Ten simple things
Funding the Future
Cyber Security for Start-ups
Fit for purchase
The Screen Industry Workers Bill
UK/New Zealand Trade Deal Takes Flight
Palmer v Alalääkkölä
Other articles you
might like
Hudson Gavin Martin was delighted to once again author the New Zealand chapter of Lexology In Depth: Space Law.
IPP3A is almost here, and agencies that collect personal information indirectly need to prepare.
As the Office of the Privacy Commissioner moves enquiries online, agencies should be ready to handle more privacy issues themselves.






.jpg)







