Data Privacy Day still sits on the calendar as a neat annual marker — 28 January, linked to the Council of Europe’s long-running Data Protection Day — but the way organisations are treating it is changing in plain sight. What used to be a single-day awareness push is now a week-long enterprise prompt: Data Privacy Week, led by the National Cybersecurity Alliance, runs from 26 to 30 January this year.
That evolution reflects the reality that privacy has become a competitive and operational battleground, not simply a legal hygiene factor. The organisations that can explain, evidence, and defend how data is used — across AI deployments, suppliers, and day-to-day workflows — are increasingly the ones that win trust and move faster with fewer self-inflicted shocks.
“January 28th is Data Privacy Day, a reminder that protecting data is a shared responsibility. This year it arrives amid disruption, shifting regulation, rapid AI adoption, and heightened global tensions which are all placing greater pressure on how data is used and governed,” says Dan Bridges, Technical Director – International at Dropzone AI.
That pressure shows up at the board level in two forms. The first is downside risk: IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report puts the global average cost of a breach at $4.4 million. The second is upside value: privacy maturity is now a differentiator that can shorten procurement cycles, open doors with risk-averse partners, and keep customers from quietly churning when trust erodes.
As Sam Peters, Chief Product Officer at IO, puts it: “Data privacy has become a commercial expectation, not simply a regulatory one. And organisations with weak privacy maturity are increasingly being exposed.”
Regulation fatigue is real —
After years of GDPR awareness campaigns, many leaders think they know what “good” looks like — and some teams have grown numb to the alphabet soup of overlapping rules, frameworks, and audits. That complacency is exactly what makes 2026 so awkward: privacy obligations are not standing still, and the gap between policy and practice is now easier for regulators, customers, and partners to spot.
“Everyone may be familiar with the term ‘data protection’, and feel like they know what it means, but I’d question whether it has lost its meaning over recent years,” says Martin Davies, Senior Audit Alliance Manager at Drata. “This is further compounded by a plethora of regulations that businesses need to adhere to, so much so that they almost merge into one in people’s minds, meaning that the GDPR – and the risk of significant fines – has lost the punch and priority that it once had.”
In the UK, the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 is now part of the practical context for organisations that assumed privacy reform was all talk. Government commencement plans and the Information Commissioner’s Office roadmap make clear this is an implementation story, not just a legislative one. For multinational businesses, it sits alongside a wider set of cross-border sensitivities — including the European Commission’s December 2025 renewal of the UK’s adequacy decisions, which preserves smoother EU–UK personal data flows while keeping the politics of alignment firmly in the background.
The risk for leaders is treating all of that as “someone else’s problem”, be it a legal matter or a future project. Davies argues Data Privacy Day, and the week around it, is a forcing function for a different posture: “We need to reset this way of thinking. Organisations can take days like today as the opportunity to recalibrate on their data protection strategies and ensure that they are as robust as they should be to ensure genuine continuous compliance…”
AI has made data use harder to see —
The most significant shift behind the “battlefield” framing is that data use is becoming less legible. Customers, employees, and even senior leaders can struggle to see where personal data flows, what decisions are being made with it, and how to challenge outcomes — especially as AI becomes ubiquitous.
“As AI becomes embedded into everyday services, many people lack clarity on what personal data is being stored, where it is being used, or how decisions are being made about it,” Bridges says. “When data practices are hidden behind technical language and opaque systems, uncertainty quickly leads to a lack of trust.”
That change makes older privacy advice feel inadequate. It also changes what “doing privacy well” looks like in practice. “Traditional advice around online safety advice no longer feels relevant in today’s digital environment. When data use is largely invisible, confidence in data protection can no longer rest solely on individual behaviour; it must be earned by the organisations designing and deploying these technologies,” Bridges adds.
For many businesses, the pressure is amplified by the EU AI Act’s phased timeline, which is already shaping expectations around transparency, governance, and organisational capability.
Peters frames the shift as an accountability test. “This year’s Data Privacy Day theme, “You have the power to take charge of your data,” is ultimately about accountability. For organisations, that means proving data privacy is governed in practice, not just on paper,” he says. “Customers, partners and regulators now expect organisations to demonstrate how privacy is embedded into day-to-day operations. Policies alone are no longer enough.”
That “proof” is how data is mapped, minimised, retained, and accessed; how consent is captured and reversed; how third-party processors are controlled; how AI systems are gated from sensitive data; and how incidents are detected and contained when, inevitably, something goes wrong.
The unremarkable breach —
A second uncomfortable truth sits behind many privacy headlines: the breach that hurts you rarely arrives as a spectacular hack. In many organisations, the more frequent problem is quieter — misdirected emails, accidental attachments, incorrect permissions, and “routine” data exposure that scales because it happens so often.
Mick Leach, Field CISO at Abnormal AI, warns that the everyday threat is still being underestimated: “When we talk about data protection, most people will assume that we mean protecting data from unauthorised access from threat actors, but according to Gartner, the leading cause of email-vectored data leakage continues to be human error.”
That matters because the consequences are the same, whether the root cause is malice or mistake. “Whether it’s a small mistake caused by human error, or a technical mishap, if it contains sensitive information like financial data, it constitutes a breach and can result in business harm. This includes financial remediation, regulatory penalties, and impact on customer trust,” Leach says.
He points to a blind spot that feels almost structural in many security programmes: “Despite investments in inbound defences, outbound email risk remains hugely unmonitored. We recently found that 96% of organisations encountered data loss or exposure to misdirected email within the past year. This means that while organisations protect their front door, they’re leaving the back one wide open.”
Training helps, but it cannot be the only answer. “While educating staff on the importance of verifying contacts, training alone can’t fix these mistakes,” Leach adds. “Organisations should look to invest in tools like behavioural AI that understand typical behaviour and flag any deviations.”
The broadening attack surface —
Kev Breen, Senior Director Cyber Threat Research at Immersive, argues the “privacy battlefield” language is accurate because attackers are increasingly optimising for scale and ease. “Data privacy remains one of the most significant business risks organisations face, as attackers increasingly focus on stealing large volumes of sensitive data with minimal effort. Once exposed, that data is routinely reused for phishing and social engineering, creating lasting consequences for customers and organisations alike.”
He also points to generative AI adoption as a turning point in internal exposure risk. “In 2025, rapid adoption of generative AI further expanded risk, as organisations rushed to deploy tools that give employees and systems direct access to internal data. Architectures such as RAG-enabled chat interfaces were often implemented without sufficient safeguards, leading to accidental exposure through prompt injection and misuse.”
That is not a problem that can be solved by “security” in isolation. Breen’s emphasis is on preparedness and operational response as much as prevention: “As Data Privacy Week 2026 reminds us, protecting data isn’t just about keeping bad actors out. It’s about battle-testing teams so they can recognise exposure risks early, respond effectively under pressure, limit damage, and recover quickly when a cyber crisis inevitably occurs”.
The supply chain adds another layer. Peters notes that privacy expectations are travelling through vendor relationships, not just regulator guidance. “Similarly, a growing number of UK and US businesses now require GDPR compliance from their suppliers as a condition of doing business,” he says. “Taking charge of data means taking responsibility for how privacy works in practice – across the organisation and beyond.”
Ownership and control are becoming privacy questions —
The final battleground is control — where data sits, who can reach it, and how confidently an organisation can answer those questions when challenged by a customer, a regulator, or a partner.
Michael Murphy, Deputy CTO at Arqit, links that directly to the way infrastructure has changed. “The world data sits in today is very different from even a few years ago. Infrastructure is more distributed, regulation is tighter and geopolitical boundaries matter more. In that environment, data privacy can’t be separated from data ownership and control – which is why Data Privacy Week matters more now than ever, for businesses and individuals alike.”
Murphy argues that the risk often begins with outsourcing without visibility. “Too often, organisations hand data over to third parties without fully understanding how it is stored, accessed or deleted. When that happens, visibility is reduced. They may not know where their data resides, who can access it, or how securely it is being handled. That loss of control creates real risk.”
Even “good encryption” can be misapplied if it only protects data at rest and in transit. “Encryption plays a critical role here, but only when it’s applied in the right way. Simply protecting data at rest or in transit is no longer enough. Organisations must consider how data is protected while it’s being processed, especially in shared or cloud environments,” he says.
Data Privacy Week’s expansion is a clue about what has changed: privacy is no longer an annual reminder to update policies. It must be a continuous operating model decision, made in product roadmaps, procurement contracts, AI deployments, and everyday communication habits. The organisations that treat privacy as a lived discipline are the ones most likely to turn this “battlefield” into advantage.
You must be logged in to post a comment.