Defending Against Data Breaches in the Age of Deepfakes
Higher education is facing an increasingly aggressive and coordinated threat environment. The recent string of data breaches across the Ivy League highlights how threat actors are systematically testing elite establishments. Now, as AI drives increased frequency and sophistication in social engineering — an attack method that manipulates human psychology — universities are becoming a growing target.
This risk is compounded by the nature of higher education itself. Universities are uniquely exposed because of the volume of sensitive data they manage. From student records and financial aid information to payroll data, donor files, alumni databases, and cutting-edge research, higher education institutions represent a high-value focus for cyber criminals, who thrive in environments where trust-based workflows are the norm and staff are stretched thin.
Increasingly, attackers are exploiting people rather than systems. Threat actors take advantage of moments of urgency, rely on impersonation, and capitalize on assumptions that a request from familiar authority figures is legitimate. World Economic Forum research indicates that cyber-enabled fraud now affects the majority of global executives, with phishing and impersonation emerging as the dominant attack methods. As social-engineering attacks surpass ransomware as the top cyber risk, institutions must reevaluate their cybersecurity practices.
Structural and Operational Vulnerabilities Within Universities
Many of the risks facing higher education stem from long-standing structural and organizational challenges rather than a lack of awareness. Universities often operate within highly decentralized IT environments, with multiple departments managing their own systems, vendors, and data flows. While this structure supports academic autonomy, it also creates fragmented security controls and inconsistent verification practices.
These environments depend heavily on trust, speed, and informal workflows. Those conditions are highly vulnerable to social engineering. When authority is decentralized, and communication volumes spike, attackers do not need to breach systems. They only need to exploit human assumptions.
AI has dramatically amplified this risk. Threat actors now deploy hyper-realistic voice cloning and impersonation techniques that are harder than ever to detect and often carefully timed to exploit operational pressure. Universities experience predictable periods of heightened activity, such as early decision and final admissions cycles. These moments create a perfect storm of increased communications, overextended staff, and reduced tolerance for disruption.
Reducing Risk Without Disrupting Operations
With the convergence of peak operational cycles and advanced impersonation tactics, universities face heightened risk. The good news is that institutions don't need to overhaul their operations to make meaningful changes. Even small, consistent behavioral adjustments can significantly reduce the likelihood of a successful attack.
First, never share sensitive information on the spot. Anyone responsible for proprietary or personal data should operate with heightened skepticism. Attackers will target personal data from students, faculty, and suppliers, including names, contact information, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and even bank account details. This data is a goldmine for threat actors who can use it in social engineering attacks like identity theft and financial fraud. The sensitive nature of universities' data requires one to pause before sharing anything, regardless of how legitimate or urgent a request appears.
Second, always verify unexpected requests through a separate channel, and treat any unexpected phone call, e-mail, or message as suspect until confirmed. Attackers can impersonate university leaders, student administration representatives, or other trusted figures you may not think twice about authorizing. Make a habit of verifying requests through a separate communication channel, as cyber criminals will leverage situations when verification feels inconvenient or disruptive.
Finally, build reflexes that seamlessly incorporate into everyday workflows. The goal isn't to slow operations; it's to build verification instincts at the points attackers find most strategic. Take the recent string of attacks across the United States at the end of 2025: They all occurred right around early decision season, a period of elevated activity for universities. This underscores how cybercriminals deliberately time their operations to exploit moments of peak operational pressure and vulnerability.
Recognizing and Responding to Deepfake Attempts
AI-powered voice cloning is advancing fast, and its potential to amplify social engineering campaigns is significant. As this technology becomes more accessible, here are a few red flags that faculty, staff, and students should watch for, and how to respond when something feels off.
Listen closely for inconsistencies like stiff speech, missing background noise, or a tone that slips in and out of sounding like the person you know. It's especially important to be alert to calls requesting system access or prompting a password reset, even if they claim to be from a colleague or a trusted university official.
Asking an unexpected follow-up question can also be effective. Make up a restaurant and ask if they like the food, or take a regionally relevant approach like "How do you like the Cowboys?" For someone in Texas, they will talk about the NFL, but AI might answer as if it's a literal cowboy. Someone truly affiliated with your institution will respond naturally, while AI or impostors may give vague or incorrect answers.
Institutions may have the most sophisticated security systems, but humans will always be vulnerable to social engineering attacks. Don't let emotions get the best of you, and be alert to anxiety-driven pressures. Attackers will frequently attempt to trigger strong emotions and capitalize on seemingly urgent requests like tuition payments, financial aid changes, grant deadlines, payroll issues, or admissions decisions. If something feels off, trust that instinct, disengage from the interaction, and verify independently.
Above all, always be on guard. For any inbound message you aren't expecting, ask questions to help determine whether it's legitimate. A single moment of misplaced trust, such as being deceived into sharing confidential information, can have widespread consequences. University offices, vendors, or service providers won't pressure you to share credentials, student records, or financial information, nor ask you to bypass established security or approval processes, so be vigilant.
Protect Your Institution Without Slowing the Mission
As deepfakes, AI-driven impersonation, and data breaches scale and become increasingly harder to detect, trust is emerging as one of an institution's most valuable and vulnerable assets.
Defending that trust requires more than technical controls. Security tools will always remain essential, but they aren't sufficient on their own. Strengthening organizational defenses is crucial, and organizations must go beyond simple phishing tests to build real-world preparedness for modern attacks.
Prioritizing education, verification, and human awareness doesn't slow the mission of higher education; it protects it. By normalizing the practice of pause and validation, universities can reduce risk while reinforcing a culture of accountability and care, building the foundational safeguards for institutions, students, and families alike. The institutions that invest in human defenses, especially when attackers find them most vulnerable, will be best positioned to preserve trust, protect their communities, and maintain operational momentum.