- Most British business leaders admit that they break the law to keep their business alive after ransomware attacks
- Publicly supporting ransomware prohibitions does not mean when private survival instincts take over during a violation
- Anti-ransomware policies are confronted with collapse while businesses discreetly admit that they will always negotiate with attackers
British business leaders seem united in principle behind the recent ban on government ransomware for the private sector, but the new data reveal a striking contrast between public support and real world intentions.
The investigation into the violations of Cybersecurity 2025 of Commvault found that almost all the respondents supported a ban, three out of four admitted that they would ignore it if the payment of a ransom was the only way to save their business.
This contradiction reveals the tension between political ideals and the realities of surviving a cyber attack.
The principles compete with survival instincts in crisis scenarios
The report revealed that almost half (43%) of British companies have experienced a certain form of cyber violation in the past year, with the risk of reducing size and the sector.
Consequently, preparation for cybersecurity is now considered a critical commercial function, 98% of respondents planned to prioritize it in their expenses.
It is increasingly recognized that reactive payments do not do much to guarantee recovery, especially when attackers cannot restore data even after receiving funds.
“Payment of a ransom rarely guarantees recovery and often increases the probability of being targeted again,” said Darren Thomson, CTO Emeai, Commvault.
“A well -claimed ban could help withdraw the profit from ransomware, but it must be equaled by a greater investment in prevention, detection and recovery tests …”
Many experts maintain that the solution lies in resilience, and not the ransom – therefore, there is a change towards a more robust use of antivirus tools, well -maintained terminal protection platforms (EPP) and Ransomware protection strategies integrated into business recovery systems.
These measures become essential, because the average recovery time after an incident now extends to 24 days.
For small businesses, this duration can be catastrophic and the pressure to recover quickly increases the temptation to pay.
Supporters of the proposed ban believe that it could stimulate a positive structural change – with a third of the respondents saying that this decision would encourage greater government intervention and investment in cybersecurity infrastructure.
Another third party suggests that the abolition of financial incentives for criminals could reduce the frequency of attacks.
However, even among those who support the idea, few are convinced that they would follow the rules if their business was at stake.
The British government has already applied the ban on public sector institutions such as NHS Trusts and local councils.
Despite the clear intention of the proposed legislation, compliance in practice remains doubtful, because only a tenth of the leaders interviewed said they would fully comply with the ban on a crisis.
Most do not want to risk the collapse of their business, even if it means violating the legal provisions.
