Cybersecurity in the mining supply chain has a peculiarity that is not repeated in many other industries: the same companies that compete daily for the price of copper and lithium sit down together to share how they are being attacked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
That was the starting point of the panel \u00abDigital Mining: Cybersecurity in the Era of Automation and Autonomy\u00bb of the Industrial Cyber Summit Chile 2026<\/a>, Moderated by Fernando Lucchini<\/strong>, executive director of the Mining Cybersecurity Corporation (CCMIN), with Carlos Schipmann<\/strong> (IM Regional Delivery Manager Copper at Anglo American), Miguel \u00c1ngel Elizondo<\/strong> (CISO of Antofagasta Minerals) and \u00c1lvaro Pizarro<\/strong> (Head of IT Services at SQM).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The context that Lucchini put on the table is stark: Chile is the world\u2019s largest copper producer and concentrates more than 50% of the global lithium reserves. That makes Chilean mining infrastructure by definition critical, and a hyperconnected industry, where autonomous trucks, exploration drones, and remote operation centers multiply the attack surface at a pace that none of the three panelists described as \u00abunder control.\u00bb.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Schipmann was the first to name something that the other two later confirmed: the main cybersecurity incident at Anglo American today is not a technical failure, it is a behavioral one. All the awareness-raising work they have been doing, he said without hesitation, \u00abis not being enough.\u00bb And that behavior does not stop at the employees themselves: it includes the contracting and subcontracting companies that operate within the enterprise, with access to systems and data as sensitive as those of internal personnel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Anglo American\u2019s response was to require that every company that brings in a system or handles data sign a cybersecurity annex in their contract, and then assess which of each provider\u2019s services are critical to identify gaps and build up plans for immediate action. Schipmann was clear on the underlying goal: not all companies in the chain have the same level of maturity, so they need to \u00ablevel the playing field with minimum standards\u00bb before that maturity gap becomes an entry point for an attacker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Miguel \u00c1ngel Elizondo identified the second major challenge as the convergence of IT and OT, which he described as a \u00abturning point\u00bb for which the mining industry was unprepared. The reason, he explained, is almost cultural: IT is a more developed and open world, while OT \u2014 the SCADA systems, the trucks, the physical assets of the mine\u2014 is traditionally more static and closed. Making these two philosophies coexist within a single security strategy was, in Elizondo\u2019s words, as difficult as convincing the organization itself that cybersecurity involved additional steps, from hiring specialists to investing in technology that was previously not considered necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00c1lvaro Pizarro, from SQM, agreed that IT and OT remain \u00abcompletely different worlds\u00bb that start from different assumptions about what needs to be protected. His recipe was not technological but organizational: setting up discussion tables where both worlds understand their positions, incorporating IT teams into collaborative initiatives such as CCMIN, and resolving the balance between innovation\u2014the technology plants need, teleoperation\u2014and cybersecurity, always prioritizing availability, along with confidentiality and integrity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the most concrete concepts left by the panel was the term \u00abactive waiting,\u00bb which Pizarro uses to describe SQM\u2019s stance regarding the adoption of artificial intelligence. The company\u2019s conscious decision is not to commit to long-term positions yet or lock in with a single AI provider, because models evolve too quickly to bet everything on one. Instead, SQM is taking small but constant steps, preparing to migrate services to the cloud and maintain others on-premises, with segmentation and zero trust as the foundation: knowing what assets exist and where they are before deciding how to monitor them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Schipmann offered the other side of the same coin. For miners, he said, the question of whether to move forward with AI no longer exists: the decision has been made, and much of the price of copper itself is driven by the demand generated by artificial intelligence globally. The real question, the three agreed, is how to adopt it responsibly, and that responsibility is directly aligned with each organization\u2019s cybersecurity maturity.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe problem is not the technology, it is the behavior.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
When IT and OT speak different languages<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\u00abActive waiting\u00bb: how SQM decides when to get involved in AI<\/h2>\n\n\n\n