Singapore – Neurological and biometric data is emerging as a prime target for cybercriminals and state-linked actors, according to a new report from Recorded Future‘s threat intelligence division, Insikt Group.
The report examines why brain activity, biometric, and behavioural data collected by neurotech devices is becoming increasingly valuable to hostile actors.
According to the findings, this data is likely to be exploited for state-sponsored espionage, intellectual property (IP) theft, cyber exploitation and disruption, data theft, extortion, and a growing set of legal and privacy risks.
“Organisations operating in the neurotechnology field should establish rigorous continuous monitoring, vetting, and data access controls to counter industrial espionage and malicious insiders attempting to smuggle proprietary neurotech IP out of the organisation,” said Alexander Leslie, Senior Government Affairs Advisor at Recorded Future.
“Insikt Group® recommends to audit external manufacturing partners, hardware vendors, and subsidised software ecosystems (such as integrated wearable components) to prevent backdoor data access by foreign national security regimes,” Leslie added.
As the report notes, neurotechnology is rapidly expanding beyond clinical settings, widening the attack surface for sensitive neurological and biometric data.
Consequently, as adoption grows, larger volumes of brain activity, biometric, and behavioural data are being collected by commercial platforms, opening new avenues for theft, misuse, and exploitation.
Leading neurotechnology firms are likely to face heightened targeting for IP theft, particularly from China, the report states.
This is because neurotechnology is costly to develop and strategically valuable, making companies in the sector attractive targets for state-sponsored espionage, insider threats, and cyber-enabled theft.
Successful IP theft, in turn, could erode the competitive advantage of firms that invest heavily in research and development, while military and higher education research laboratories are also likely to be targeted for access to related data.
Furthermore, attackers may seek to exfiltrate neurological and biometric datasets for extortion, surveillance, strategic intelligence, or model development.
The sensitivity of this data could make breaches particularly damaging for both individuals and companies, rendering it an attractive target for extortion-focused cybercriminals.
As the number of neurotechnology users grows, criminal theft and extortion involving brain data is likely to increase in parallel.
This may include probing neurotechnology companies for security vulnerabilities to expose mass customer datasets, or individually targeting users by threatening to reveal sensitive details about their mental state.
Much like artificial intelligence, neurotechnology has become a focal point of strategic competition between the United States and China, placing neurotech IP and neurological data at greater risk of economic espionage and cyber theft.
While the US and Europe currently lead in the number of neurotech firms, Chinese company Neuracle has produced the first brain-computer interface (BCI) approved for commercial use, with several other Chinese firms moving towards clinical trials in both invasive and non-invasive BCI technology.
More broadly, China’s consumer wearable technology market, which collects and uses biometric inputs, is expanding rapidly, providing a substantial source of biometric data that could enhance commercial AI models.
As the ability to analyse and apply biometric and neurological data advances, this data could become a strategic asset for the Chinese military, increasing its value as a target for exfiltration.
Neurotechnology devices may also be targeted by cyber threat actors seeking to disrupt their functioning and cause harm to patients.
Previous vulnerabilities discovered in medical devices have already led to safety recalls, given the risk that exploitation could prevent a device from functioning correctly.
At present, at least one vulnerability has been identified in a consumer brain-wave monitoring device that would allow attackers to remotely disrupt its output, resulting in inaccurate brain activity data.
As more medical and consumer neurological devices reach the market, additional vulnerabilities are likely to surface.
Beyond the devices themselves, threat actors can also target vulnerabilities in remote monitoring systems, including mobile applications and cloud-based software used to collect and interpret neurological data.
This data could be tampered with to produce inaccurate readings, either obscuring genuine health problems or triggering false alarms.
Attacks on IT systems at neurotechnology companies can additionally lead to downstream operational disruptions for device users, as demonstrated by the recent cyberattack on Stryker, which delayed surgical procedures after the company was unable to deliver patient-specific products.
Meanwhile, criminal theft of brain or other biometric data poses a significant extortion risk due to its inherent sensitivity.
In June 2026, neuroscience company Glucobit reported a data breach affecting its Reframe app, a digital tool that applies research on how the brain responds to alcohol to help manage alcohol use.
Criminals could weaponise such data in highly targeted scams, including using it to build trust in romance scams or to advertise fraudulent treatment programmes.
Data on alcohol use and brain activity, or correlations between the two generated by app analytics, could also be exploited in extortion schemes, with perpetrators threatening to expose the information to a victim’s friends, family, or colleagues.
Due to its sensitivity, neurological data has already come under additional scrutiny from regulators, meaning exposure of such data can result in increased penalties for companies that fail to implement adequate protection measures.
However, rapid advances in neurotechnology may create gaps in consumer protection and raise new legal questions, such as whether employers have the right to collect employees’ brain data.
An emerging protection gap concerns consumer wellness products that collect brain data or other biometrics to help improve focus, reduce stress, or manage habits. Additionally, the dual-use nature of neurotechnology devices poses risks related to export controls and other national security regulations.
