Embedded Devices: The Cybersecurity Time Bomb Inside Healthcare
1. The Invisible Backbone of Modern Healthcare
Hospitals and clinics now rely on thousands of Internet-connected devices (the Internet of Medical Things, IoMT): infusion pumps, imaging equipment, bedside monitors — even implanted pacemakers and neural interfaces. These devices enable real‑time diagnostics and care but often operate on outdated operating systems and insecure networks, making them highly vulnerable
2. Why Healthcare Devices Are High-Value Targets
Life‑critical systems: When registries go down or heart monitors fail, hospitals face existential threats—and may accede to ransom demands .
Massive attack surface: Many incidents stem from unpatched devices acting as stealthy backdoors into hospital networks (“medical device hijack” or MEDJACK).
3. Real-World Incidents: A Growing Threat Landscape
Ransomware disruption: In Q1 2025, over 650 healthcare cybersecurity incidents hit the U.S., including a high-profile ransomware attack on Frederick Health that exposed nearly a million patient records.
Irish HSE breach: Although not directly about embedded devices, the 2021 HSE ransomware attack also affected interconnected hospital systems—crippling clinical operations and interrupting patient care.
Medical implant vulnerabilities: Research going back years has proven that pacemakers and insulin pumps can be hacked wirelessly. Though rare, these exploits demonstrate the potential for patient harm.
A First in the UK: Cyberattack Leads to Fatal Delay
In June 2024, Synnovis—a pathology and diagnostic services provider for several NHS trusts in Southeast London—was hit by a ransomware attack by the Qilin group. Health officials recently confirmed that this cyberattack contributed to the death of a patient at King’s College Hospital. The “long wait” for critical blood test results was cited as a key contributing factor to the fatality.
Massive Disruption Across London
The cyberattack had widespread impact, disrupting operations at some of London’s busiest hospitals, including King’s College Hospital and Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust. The delay in diagnostics led to more than 10,000 postponed acute outpatient appointments and over 1,700 cancelled elective procedures.
Human Cost Beyond Data Breach
King’s College Hospital conducted a thorough patient safety investigation, identifying multiple contributing factors, with the delayed lab results being central
South East London’s Integrated Care Board reported 170 cases of patient harm, including severe and moderate injuries, all linked to the attack.
Synnovis' CEO, Mark Dollar, expressed sorrow: “We are deeply saddened … one of the contributing factors that led to this patient’s death”.
Financial Fallout and Data Breaches
Synnovis revealed in January that the attack had cost over £32 million. The hackers had reportedly demanded $50 million, and exfiltrated roughly 400 GB of sensitive patient data—later uploaded to the dark web—affecting over 900,000 individuals.
A Global Pattern
While this marks the UK’s first officially confirmed cyber-linked death, similar cases have surfaced internationally. A baby died in Alabama (2019) and a woman in Germany (2020) following ransomware incidents that disrupted care—though establishing direct causation has been complex.
Calls for Accountability and Action
Dr Saif Abed, former NHS doctor and cybersecurity specialist, has urged an independent inquiry, warning the UK may be seeing just “the tip of the iceberg”.
NHS and government officials have issued a cybersecurity charter for suppliers, promoting multi-factor authentication and secure backups.
A proposed Cyber Security and Resilience Bill could impose stricter obligations on private providers working with NHS networks.
Key Takeaways & Moving Forward
Patient safety is at risk when embedded diagnostic systems are disrupted.
Supply chain vulnerabilities must be addressed—outsourced labs like Synnovis need the same cybersecurity standards as NHS IT.
Legal and regulatory tightening are overdue: healthcare cyber threats require the same rigor as physical safety protocols.
Mandatory audits and drills are essential—cyber “war games” and resilience testing should become standard for healthcare providers.
4. Regulatory Gaps and Slow Enforcement
While the FDA now requires Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) and patch plans for medical devices, enforcement remains moderate.
In the UK, recent MHRA guidance is forthcoming, but many legacy devices lack updates or accountability .
Meanwhile, the U.S. HHS investigates hundreds of breaches each year, but often with limited resources and weak punishment.
5. Emerging Threats: AI & Neural Implants
Neural implants and AI‑enabled medical devices introduce new risks, including manipulation through side‑channel attacks and firmware vulnerabilities.
While still hypothetical, these threats underscore an urgent need for security-by-design in devices that directly interface with brain or muscle tissue.
6. Toward a Secure, Connected Future
Security must be embedded across the device lifecycle:
Manufacturers need secure-by-design engineering, strict patching, and built‑in authentication.
Hospitals should segment networks, run active monitoring (e.g. honeypots), and retire legacy devices swiftly.
Regulators must mandate enforceable standards and fast-track vulnerable device recalls.
Clinicians and IT must treat cybersecurity as patient safety—as critical as sterilization or hand hygiene.
7. Conclusion
Embedded medical devices have revolutionized patient care—but without robust security, they also open Kafkaesque pathways to cyber threat. As attackers sharpen their focus and devices become more intelligent and interconnected, the healthcare sector risks critical failure. The time for regulation, investment, and accountability is now—before we cross the line from data breach to life-threatening device compromise.