• CISA is losing its leadership.
• Top executives make mass-departure from US cyber protection agency.
• Overbearing political oversight makes for toxic culture.

By the end of this month, CISA – the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency – will have lost its leaders from five of the agency’s operational divisions, and six out of ten heads of regional offices.

The confirmation of the empty posts came in an email to employees from the agency’s deputy director, Madhu Gottumukkala. Among the departing executives are the heads of the Infrastructure Security Division, the Stakeholder Engagement Division, and the Integrated Operations Division, and the second-in-commands at the Emergency Communications Divisions and Cybersecurity Division.

Directors of Regions 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10 are also heading for the door, or have already left.

Speaking to Cybersecurity Dive, an anonymous CISA employee said, “There’s a lot of anxiety around when the cuts and departures will finally stop and we can move forward as an agency.”

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is part of the US Department of Homeland Security, and has a remit to secure cybersecurity and ensure the digital resilience of federal agencies. It works with industry organisations to help reduce threats from hackers who threaten national infrastructure, among other responsibilities.

At a time when threats from state-backed actors are at an all-time high, the executives’ decisions to leave the cybersecurity organisation will not have been taken lightly, with many personnel leaving the agency after many years’ work at CISA and previous organisations tasked with protecting US companies, infrastructure, and individuals.

Why CISA is losing its leadership

There is no credible evidence suggesting misconduct, scandal nor operational failure in any of the cases of the exit of leadership. Axios cites a broader culture clash between many federal organisations’ leaders and Congress, with suggestions of micromanagement, public criticism, and interference by Capitol Hill aimed at many departments.

Unnamed insiders speaking to Politico point to an “untenable working environment” at CISA and spoke of accusations made by members of Congress concerning the agency overreaching itself regarding election security. Most public statements from lawmakers attribute the personnel changes to natural attrition, a narrative notably absent from CISA’s current or past employees.

“CISA is doubling down and fulfilling its statutory mission to secure the nation’s critical infrastructure and strengthen our collective cyber defense,” said current CISA executive director Bridget Bean, commenting on the email to employees from the agency’s deputy director. “[…] We have the right team in place to fulfill that mission and ensure that we are prepared for a range of cyber threats from our adversaries.”

An article by CyberScoop cites multiple sources close to the CISA leadership describing “relentless political attacks” and points to the lack of bipartisan support for cybersecurity funding, manifest in budget instability for the agency. At the time of writing, CISA’s 2025 budget remains in limbo, leaving many cybersecurity programmes stalled. Politico reports that the agency is not able to make long-term plans due to budget insecurity.

The combination of the current political climate dictating an at-best indifferent attitude to the agency, and a growing number of cybersecurity threats, seems to have led to the majority of resignations. But their relative concurrence suggests a general agreement among executives that the writing is on the wall at CISA.

The winds of change

Like many federal organisations in the US designed to protect the public and improve the lives of citizens, CISA has found itself facing the disapprobation of the current executive. That takes the form of demands for self-vindication by federal agency managers, budget cuts, partisan oversight. And hanging over it all is the most extreme possibility of proposed dissolution of public bodies not in tune with US leaders’ rhetoric.

It will be interesting to discover which individuals will fill the many vacant positions at CISA. On paper, finding cybersecurity experts to be parachuted into what seems to be a toxic working environment may be tricky. In reality, there will likely be enough unqualified candidates cast from the same mould as the leaders of the French Vichy government to safely lower the shop shutters.