Most Organizations Do Not Fully Trust Their Cybersecurity Vendors

A vast majority of organizations do not fully trust their cybersecurity vendors. New research from Sophos shows mounting concerns over transparency, accountability, and risk in an evolving threat landscape.

The Sophos Cybersecurity Trust Reality 2026 report is based on a global, independent survey of 5,000 IT and security decision‑makers across 17 countries. It examines how trust between organizations and cybersecurity vendors is weakening and why this poses a serious operational risk.

According to the study, only a very small percentage of organizations report complete confidence in their cybersecurity providers. Most organizations rely heavily on vendors to protect vital systems and data, yet the majority do not fully trust those vendors to do so reliably. This trust gap exists across industries, company sizes, and regions.

Why do organizations struggle to evaluate vendor trustworthiness?

A major challenge identified is the inability to easily assess how trustworthy a cybersecurity vendor truly is. Most respondents struggle to evaluate both new and existing providers. The difficulty originates from limited transparency, insufficient technical detail, and a lack of independently verifiable evidence about vendors’ security practices.

Low trust is not just a perception problem, it directly affects risk posture. Over half of respondents said reduced confidence in vendors makes them more worried about experiencing a major cyber incident. Trust deficits also lead to slower decision‑making, increased operational friction, and higher likelihood of switching vendors.

“Trust is not an abstract concept in cybersecurity, it’s a measurable risk factor,” explained Ross McKerchar, CISO at Sophos. “When organizations can’t independently verify a vendor’s security maturity, transparency, and incident handling practices, that uncertainty flows directly into boardrooms and security strategies.”

Verifiable evidence emerges as the key to trust

The strongest driver of trust is verifiable evidence. Organizations value independent audits, certifications, external assessments, and clear proof of operational maturity. Vendors that provide factual, detailed, and accessible security information are considered as trustworthy.

This report identifies a mismatch between the views of technical teams and senior leadership. IT professionals tend to prioritize technical performance and incident transparency, and executives and boards focus more on third‑party validation and risk assurance. This misalignment can complicate cybersecurity decisions.

Steps organizations can take to rebuild confidence

Organizations are advised to treat trust as a measurable risk factor, not an assumption. The report recommends that buyers demand evidence‑based trust from cybersecurity vendors by requiring independently verified proof of security practices, such as third‑party audits, certifications, and documented incident‑response processes. Organizations should prioritize transparency, factual reporting, and access to detailed technical information when selecting or reviewing security partners. This helps reduce uncertainty and allows decision‑makers to more accurately assess real‑world security maturity.

This study also suggests improving internal alignment between IT teams and senior leadership. Technical staff and executives often value different trust indicators, so organizations should establish shared evaluation criteria that combine operational performance with external validation. It’s recommended to conduct regular vendor reviews, have clear expectations for disclosure during incidents, and perform ongoing verification. Organizations can embed trust checks into governance and procurement processes to reduce risk, improve confidence at the board level, and strengthen their overall cybersecurity resilience.