Why Human Error Is Electronics Design Cybersecurity's Biggest Weakness

Electronics design teams often work with intellectual property worth millions in research and development costs. Electronics development IP can include proprietary schematics, BOM lists, product roadmaps, design documentation, and more. It’s a tempting target for competitors and criminals, not to mention foreign state actors—a significant concern for electronics design companies operating in the defense sector or other highly regulated industries.

Over the last decade, electronics development has shifted toward global collaboration, with engineering teams working across multiple regions and time zones. Interconnectivity is essential for modern product development, but it has expanded the threat surface for cybersecurity incidents. Design files must be accessible to authorized team members regardless of location, but collaboration creates security challenges when sensitive data must be protected from unauthorized access.

Regulatory requirements add another layer of complexity. Industries like aerospace and defense and medical device development face strict data handling standards. Violations can result in severe penalties, lost contracts, and damaged reputations. Compliance isn't optional—it's business-critical.

Human Error: The Number One Cybersecurity Risk

Despite substantial investments in technical cybersecurity controls, human error remains the vulnerable link in the security chain. A recent study by Stanford University Professor Jeff Hancock found that 88% of data breaches involve some form of human error. 

Human errors in electronics design security take many forms. Engineers might inadvertently share files through unsecured channels, reuse passwords across systems, or fall victim to convincing phishing attempts. Even small mistakes can have catastrophic consequences.

The 2023 MOVEit breach exemplifies how technical vulnerabilities combined with human error create a perfect storm scenario. The file transfer software vulnerability impacted over 2,500 organizations and nearly 100 million individuals. When employees used the vulnerable system to transfer sensitive design files, they unknowingly exposed it to the Russia-affiliated Cl0p cyber gang.

Similarly, Fortinet's recent leak of 440GB of customer data from a third-party SharePoint drive demonstrates how human decisions about data storage locations directly impact security outcomes. The attacker accessed data through an insufficiently secure cloud storage solution.

It's impossible to eradicate human error entirely, but electronics design companies can use cloud security compliance tools that make secure practices intuitive and insecure ones difficult. In this article, we explore the types of human error electronics design projects should be aware of and how a purpose-built secure collaboration platform like Altium 365 creates environments where secure behavior is the path of least resistance.

Understanding Human Error in Electronics Design Security

Human error is an unintentional action that compromises the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of sensitive information. Security incidents attributed to human error don't necessarily indicate negligence or incompetence. They often reflect natural cognitive limitations, systemic pressures, or inadequate safeguards. Even highly skilled professionals make mistakes when facing tight deadlines, poorly designed tools, or ambiguous security protocols.

Types of Human Error

Human error typically falls into three categories.

Skill-based errors occur during routine, automated tasks that professionals typically perform without conscious thought:

• Attaching the wrong file to an email containing design specifications
• Forgetting to encrypt sensitive files before transmission
• Leaving workstations unlocked in shared environments
• Mistyping email addresses when sharing access credentials

Decision-based errors involve conscious choices made with incomplete information or flawed reasoning:

• Bypassing security protocols to meet aggressive deadlines
• Choosing convenient but insecure file-sharing methods
• Deferring critical security updates that might interrupt workflow
• Underestimating the sensitivity of certain design documents

System-based errors stem from organizational workflows, policies, or tool configurations that inadvertently encourage insecure practices:

• Overly complex security procedures that prompt users to seek workarounds
• Insufficient role-based access controls for design repositories
• Ambiguous responsibility for security tasks between engineering and IT teams

Error Patterns in Electronics Design Environments

Electronics design teams face unique security challenges that exacerbate human error risks.

• Legacy Systems: Many engineering teams rely on specialized software with outdated security features, creating friction between usability and security.
• Complex Supply Chain: The need to collaborate with external partners increases the likelihood of file-sharing errors and access control mistakes.
• Time Pressure: Competitive markets drive aggressive development timelines that force engineers to prioritize speed over security.
• Technical Focus: Engineers typically concentrate on functional requirements rather than security implications.

The most effective way to limit the impact of human error combines targeted training with thoughtfully designed systems that reduce cognitive burden. The goal is to make secure practices the easy, default option.

Key Areas Where Inadequate Systems Facilitate Human Error

Electronics design security requires systems that account for human fallibility. When security frameworks demand perfect compliance or rely on cumbersome processes, they create conditions where mistakes become inevitable. The following areas represent critical vulnerabilities where inadequate systems amplify the impact of human error.

Unencrypted File Storage

Electronics designs typically contain valuable intellectual property, yet many companies still store these files without encryption. Lack of encryption at rest transforms simple mistakes into serious security incidents. When an engineer accidentally shares the wrong link or forwards an attachment to an unintended recipient, unencrypted storage means sensitive data is immediately exposed.

Security teams also face challenges tracking who accesses these unencrypted files. Without proper visibility and logging, organizations cannot detect unauthorized access until after a breach has occurred—often too late to prevent data exfiltration or IP theft.

Insecure File Transfers

Engineers frequently need to share large design files with colleagues, partners, and manufacturers. When faced with tight deadlines or file size limitations, teams often resort to unsecured methods:

• Personal email accounts that lack enterprise-grade security
• Consumer file-sharing services without proper access controls
• USB drives that can be lost or stolen
• FTP servers with basic password authentication

These practices create opportunities for data interception and increase vulnerability to social engineering. Attackers frequently send fraudulent "file transfer notifications" that mimic legitimate services, tricking recipients into revealing credentials or downloading malware.

Over-Privileged Access

Many design environments follow an all-or-nothing approach to system permissions. Even junior engineers or temporary contractors receive administrative rights to eliminate workflow bottlenecks. When all users can access critical files and modify system settings, a single mistaken click can compromise entire projects.

Shared Credentials

Despite recognized security best practices, credential sharing remains common. However, it eliminates individual accountability and creates serious security gaps:

• Credentials may be stored in unsecured locations for easy access
• Departed employees retain access to sensitive information
• Activity logs cannot distinguish between authorized and unauthorized actions

When a security incident occurs, shared credentials make it nearly impossible to figure out whether it resulted from an honest mistake or malicious intent.

Compliance Violations

Electronics designs for defense, aerospace, and other regulated industries must meet stringent compliance requirements like ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) and DFARS (Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement). Human errors in these environments carry severe legal and financial consequences.

Common compliance violations stemming from inadequate systems include:

• Sending technical data via unencrypted email to international partners
• Storing controlled information on cloud servers without proper security controls
• Granting foreign nationals access to ITAR-controlled designs
• Failing to maintain required documentation of access controls and data handling

Inadequate systems dramatically increase the impact of human error. Even well-intentioned employees operating in flawed frameworks can inadvertently compromise sensitive data or violate regulations. The next section explores how secure collaboration platforms designed for the electronics product development incorporate security features that reduce these risks.

Mitigating Human Error with Secure Collaboration Software

Purpose-built collaboration platforms for electronics design minimize security risks by making secure practices the path of least resistance. These systems recognize human limitations and create environments where security is the default, not an extra step.

Altium 365 addresses the key vulnerabilities in electronics design security, both through its default security features and through the Organizational Security Package for organizations that require even more control. 

• Encrypted storage and transfers: All design data is encrypted at rest and in transit, eliminating the risk of accidental exposure.
• Role-based access control: Granular permission settings ensure team members access only what they need, reducing the impact of credential compromise.
• Event logs with SIEM Integration: Access is tracked and attributed to specific users, creating accountability, accelerating issue awareness, and streamlining security investigations.
• Integrated design reviews: Formal review processes with commenting and approval workflows replace ad-hoc file sharing, keeping feedback secure within the platform.
• Centralized BOM management: Altium 365 BOM Portal keeps component data and supply chain information within the secure environment, preventing exposure through external spreadsheets.
• Single sign-on and two-factor authentication: Integration with enterprise identity management systems strengthens access security while maintaining usability.
• ITAR-supportive environment: Altium 365 GovCloud provides a dedicated cloud region operated exclusively by US persons for compliance-sensitive projects.

By embedding these security features directly into the design workflow, Altium 365 enables engineers to focus on innovation rather than security administration. Learn more about how Altium 365 protects your design data. Read our comprehensive security whitepaper or try Altium 365 for yourself.