Hacktivism Is a Growing Threat to Higher Education

• By JP Castellanos
• 08/27/25

In recent years, colleges and universities have faced an evolving array of cybersecurity challenges. But one threat is showing signs of becoming both more frequent and more politically charged: hacktivism.

Hacktivism, or cyberattacks driven by political, ideological, or social motivations, is not new to higher education. In the past decade, campuses have been hit by everything from website defacements to distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) campaigns aimed at disrupting events. In some cases, these attacks have been conducted by students or alumni; in others, they've been launched by global actors with no direct tie to the institution.

However, recent events suggest that higher ed leaders can no longer view hacktivism as an occasional nuisance. Instead, it is fast becoming a persistent, high-impact risk.

A Warning Sign: Columbia University's Recent Breach

In June, Columbia University suffered a targeted cyber attack that stole millions of past admissions records. The self-described hacktivist claimed the goal was to expose whether Columbia continued race-based admissions after the Supreme Court's 2023 affirmative action ban. University officials called the attack sophisticated and politically motivated.

The breach didn't occur in a vacuum. At the time, Columbia was already under intense scrutiny on several fronts: federal investigations into its affirmative action practices post-SCOTUS ruling; $400 million in federal research funds frozen over mishandled antisemitism complaints; and restrictions on campus protests amid mounting political and public pressure.

Just months earlier, New York University suffered a similar politically charged intrusion in which its website was briefly replaced with what appeared to be admissions data and a racial epithet. 

These cases reflect a broader pattern of ideologically motivated attacks on academic institutions, often intended to advance political or geopolitical agendas. In the U.S., Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have faced repeated "swatting" incidents meant to intimidate and disrupt. Globally, universities in the U.K., Australia, and Israel have also become symbolic targets in geopolitical conflicts.

The Next Phase of Hacktivism in Higher Ed

The rise in hacktivist activity is occurring against a backdrop of heightened political polarization and significant changes in federal policy toward higher education. These shifts have created new fault lines that bad actors may exploit.

It's important to note that this is not a one-sided threat. Hacktivist targeting can come from across the political spectrum, shaped by the narratives that dominate each side's discourse:

• Right-leaning attackers could target institutions they believe are defying new federal directives on admissions, diversity programs, or campus speech. Recent right-wing narratives have centered on issues like COVID-19, election fraud claims, foreign aid, and immigration, sometimes fueled by misinformation.
• Left-leaning attackers, meanwhile, could target schools seen as supporting such directives. Left-wing narratives often focus on police brutality, systemic racism, economic inequality, and the Israel-Gaza conflict, sometimes accusing institutions of siding with corporations, the wealthy, or governments at the expense of social justice.

That dynamic leaves universities in a no-win situation: complying with one set of expectations may make them a target for another group. In other words, every campus, regardless of size, location, or mission, is potentially in the crosshairs.

Understanding the Risks

Hacktivist campaigns against higher ed can take many forms, from attention-grabbing disruptions to covert data theft and exposure. Today, the most pressing risks fall into four main categories:

Extortion: While often associated with financially motivated cybercrime, extortion has become a common hacktivist tactic. The primary method is ransomware (i.e., encrypting files and demanding payment for their release), but in hacktivism, the "ransom" may also involve political demands. For example, an attacker might demand the cancellation of a speaker, the reinstatement of a program, or public statements on a policy issue.

Disruption: Universities rely on uninterrupted access to IT systems for teaching, research, and operations. Hacktivists can create large-scale disruption through DDoS attacks that flood servers with traffic until they crash; ransomware that locks critical systems; wipers that destroy data rather than encrypt it, leaving systems inoperable; and swatting, which interrupts operations and creates fear through physical police intervention.

Data Leaks: Data theft is not just a breach of privacy; in the hands of hacktivists, it can be a tool for public shaming and political leverage. Stolen data might include internal e-mails, research notes, donor records, or confidential student files. These leaks are often strategically timed to maximize embarrassment or public backlash.

Cyber-Physical Threats: Perhaps the most dangerous evolution in hacktivism is the convergence of cyber attacks with real-world threats. This includes doxxing, or publishing personal information about faculty, administrators, students, or donors online; and swatting, or using stolen or publicized information to direct law enforcement to a victim's location under false pretenses. In these cases, the initial cyber actors and the individuals who act on the exposed information are often unrelated. Physical actors may be opportunists, extremists, or people in crisis, but the outcome can be harassment, threats, or even violence.

How to Reduce the Risk

Universities are uniquely appealing targets for hacktivists: open networks create broad attack surfaces, diverse stakeholders fuel ideological disputes, and high visibility guarantees media attention. Meanwhile, a wealth of sensitive data, from research to donor lists and student records, offers prime opportunities for exploitation.

While the risk can't be eliminated, universities can reduce it by:

• Strengthening network defenses: Segment networks to limit attacker movement, patch vulnerabilities promptly, and deploy intrusion detection/prevention systems.
• Protecting sensitive data: Encrypt data in transit and at rest, enforce strict access controls, and conduct regular account audits.
• Guarding against DDoS attacks: Work with ISPs on mitigation services and maintain redundant pathways for critical systems.
• Preparing for incidents: Maintain and test an incident response plan covering hacktivism, swatting, and cyber-physical threats, with clear roles for security, law enforcement, and communications teams.
• Monitoring for threats: Use cyber threat intelligence to track dark web chatter, social media, and other early warning signs.
• Building a cyber-aware community: Train faculty, staff, and students on phishing awareness, cyber hygiene, and safe online practices to reduce vulnerabilities and the risk of doxxing.

Staying Ahead of Hacktivist Threats

Hacktivism won't fade with political shifts; if anything, attacks will intensify as universities remain central to national debates.

Higher ed leaders must treat politically motivated cyber threats as seriously as criminal ones, fostering a culture where security supports, rather than hinders, openness and inclusivity. In an age where one breach can spark national headlines, universities need to anticipate and prevent incidents, not just respond. This requires investment, planning, and recognizing that on today's campus, cybersecurity is inseparable from the institution's mission and values.