Public Sector IT Services Cos Delivering Cloud and Security Solutions


Date: 25 June 2026

Featured Image

Government IT is under pressure from all sides. Cyberattacks on public infrastructure hit record numbers in 2024. The ransomware attack on Change Healthcare alone cost over $870 million and exposed how fragile critical systems can be. Meanwhile, citizens want digital services that work like Revolut, not like a DMV queue from 2009. 

Cloud migration, zero-trust architecture, AI-powered case management — these aren’t buzzwords anymore. They’re survival requirements. This article breaks down which IT vendors are actually built for government work and how to choose between them.

Top IT Companies Delivering Cloud and Cybersecurity for Government in 2026

DXC Technology

DXC

Over 50 years of government IT experience. That’s not marketing copy — DXC works with 280 public sector clients across 25 countries, including the European Space Agency (where they built a GenAI platform for scientific data processing) and the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care, where an AI-driven workplace tool boosted staff productivity. The company holds a GSA Multiple Award Schedule contract in the US, which means federal agencies can buy directly without lengthy procurement cycles.

DXC’s public sector stack covers:

  • Secure Sovereign AI — a private AI full-stack that keeps government data away from public cloud environments
  • Government-as-a-Platform — modular, reusable service building blocks that let different agencies share digital infrastructure instead of each building from scratch
  • Justice Management Solutions — digital case management for courts that replaces paper-heavy processes
  • Zero Trust cybersecurity — continuous verification of every user and device, no implicit trust inside the perimeter

Whitelane Research named DXC a Top Public Sector Performer in Europe in 2025. Partnerships with Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, and ServiceNow mean integrations aren’t a nightmare.

Read more about their government services at https://dxc.com/industries/public-sector

Sopra Steria

Sopra

The Franco-Norwegian firm is probably the most embedded IT vendor in European public administration you’ve never heard of. Sopra Steria runs digital identity systems, border management platforms, and tax collection infrastructure for several EU member states. Their work with the French Ministry of Interior on biometric passport systems is the kind of project most vendors claim they can do — Sopra Steria actually delivered it. Strong presence in Nordic e-government, which consistently ranks as the world’s most digitally advanced.

Leidos

Leidos

Leidos is the name that comes up whenever US defense and intelligence IT gets discussed seriously. With over $15 billion in annual revenue, most of it from US DoD and DHS contracts, they’re not a mid-size vendor in any traditional sense but compared to the usual behemoths, their focus is sharper. Leidos built and manages IT systems for the Air Force’s logistics network and runs cybersecurity operations for several federal civilian agencies. Their CyberSecurity Operations Center (CSOC) handles threat detection using AI-assisted behavioral analysis.

NTT DATA

NTT Data

Tokyo-based NTT DATA has been quietly building government IT capabilities across APAC and Europe for two decades. Their strength is large-scale digital transformation — migrating monolithic legacy systems (think COBOL-era mainframes still running social benefits disbursement) to modern cloud-native architectures. In Japan, they were involved in the My Number digital identity rollout. In Europe, they’ve worked on smart city platforms in Germany and Italy. SAP migration and Azure cloud services are their sweet spots.

Eviden (Atos spin-off)

Eviden

After Atos restructured in 2024, the digital and security arm rebranded as Eviden. What remained is actually a focused cybersecurity and high-performance computing business with serious EU government credentials. Eviden manages cybersecurity for Euroclear and several European institutional clients. Their BullSequana supercomputers power national weather services and defense simulation systems across Europe. For governments worried about AI sovereignty — specifically, running large language models on national infrastructure without touching AWS or Azure — Eviden’s private HPC offering is one of very few credible options.

NEC Corporation (Government Solutions Division)

Not the consumer electronics brand from the ’90s. NEC’s government division handles public safety AI, facial recognition for border control (used in multiple Asian airports), and smart city platforms. In Singapore and Japan, NEC has deployed predictive policing analytics and emergency response coordination tools. Controversial in civil liberties circles, but technically strong. For governments prioritizing operational security and physical infrastructure monitoring, NEC remains a serious contender.

What to Look for Before Signing a Contract?

Not every IT company that says “public sector” has actually delivered at scale for government. Some have one decent case study and a lot of sales deck. So what actually matters?

  • Proven government track record. Look for vendors with 10+ years of documented public sector deployments — not just a pilot with a regional municipality.
  • Security clearances and compliance. FedRAMP authorization in the US, Cyber Essentials Plus in the UK, ISO 27001 — these aren’t optional.
  • Data sovereignty capabilities. Especially post-2022, European governments won’t touch a vendor that can’t guarantee data stays within national borders.
  • Local partner ecosystems. Large governments don’t want a single vendor. They want integrators with regional expertise who know the procurement rules.
  • AI and modernization roadmap. Legacy system replacement is expensive. Vendors offering Modernization-as-a-Service or hybrid approaches — where legacy and cloud run side by side during transition — are simply more realistic for most governments.

FAQs

1. Do these companies work with smaller municipalities, not just national governments? Yes, most offer scaled-down packages or work through regional partners. DXC, Sopra Steria, and NTT DATA all have local system integrator networks specifically for sub-national government clients.

2. Is FedRAMP authorization required for non-US government projects? No — FedRAMP is a US-specific framework. EU governments typically reference ENiSA guidelines, ISO 27001, and NIS2 compliance. UK agencies use Cyber Essentials Plus and the NCSC Cloud Security Principles.

3. How long does a typical cloud migration take for a government agency? Honest answer: longer than anyone promises. A medium-sized national agency can expect 18–36 months for a full migration. Hybrid approaches, where legacy runs alongside cloud during transition, are now standard practice rather than a compromise.

4. What is “sovereign AI” and why do governments care? Sovereign AI means running AI models on infrastructure physically and legally controlled by the government — no data leaving national jurisdiction, no dependency on foreign cloud providers. After geopolitical tensions around data access post-2022, this became a hard requirement for most EU and APAC governments.

 





Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Ghost CMS flaw abused to push ClickFix attacks on hundreds of sites

Pierluigi Paganini
May 25, 2026

Threat actors are actively exploiting a security flaw, tracked as CVE-2026-26980, in Ghost CMS that was fixed months ago in real attacks against unpatched websites. According to Qianxin, the campaign has already affected more than 700 sites, including well-known organizations and universities.

The vulnerability is an SQL injection issue in Ghost’s Content API that can let an attacker read data from the database without logging in. In the worst case, this can expose the Admin API key, which can allow attackers to take over the site.

That key matters because it can be used to change published content. In this campaign, attackers used it to edit articles on compromised Ghost sites and insert malicious JavaScript at the end of pages. The goal was not just defacement, but to turn trusted websites into launch points for further malware delivery.

“After an in-depth investigation and analysis, we determined that this was not a targeted intrusion against the customer, but rather a large-scale poisoning campaign by an in-the-wild attack group targeting Ghost CMS. Although CVE-2026-26980 was publicly disclosed as early as February 19, a large number of users did not patch and upgrade in time, providing an opportunity for attackers.” reads the advisory published by Qianxin. “At least two groups are currently actively conducting such poisoning operations, and some sites have even become the target of competition between the two parties, with different malicious code being implanted one after another within a single day.”

The inserted code led visitors through a two-step chain. First, the page loaded a remote script that checked the browser and decided what the visitor should see. Then real victims were redirected to a fake verification page that looked like a normal “I’m human” check.

This is where the ClickFix part began. The page told users to press Windows+R, paste a command, and hit Enter. In practice, that command downloaded and started a malware payload on the victim’s machine. It was a classic social engineering trick: make the user do the dangerous part themselves.

Qianxin says the first signs of this activity appeared in early May. The malicious code found in the campaign had a compilation date of February 16, the same day Ghost announced the fix for CVE-2026-26980. That suggests the attackers moved quickly once they saw how many sites had not been updated.

The affected websites cover a wide range of sectors. Roughly half are personal blogs or independent sites, but the list also includes technology blogs, AI sites, media outlets, crypto projects, and educational institutions. Qianxin researchers say victims include sites linked to Harvard, Oxford, and DuckDuckGo.

The attack chain was also designed to be flexible. The loaders could fetch different payloads depending on the target, and the operators changed infrastructure several times.

“entire attack process has obvious five-stage characteristics of “CMS Takeover → Page Poisoning → Two-stage Loading → Social Engineering Lure (FakeCaptcha/ClickFix) → Malware Delivery”, and the entire process is highly automated: bulk vulnerability scanning → automatic key extraction → bulk injection → dynamic C2 distribution.” states the report.

In some cases, they switched domains after detection, keeping the campaign alive even when part of the chain was blocked.

“Through feature scanning of publicly accessible pages, we have cumulatively identified more than 700 poisoned victim domains, and have proactively contacted the sites for which contact information could be obtained, notifying them of the poisoning.” continues the report.

Qianxin also believes at least two different groups are involved. In some cases, the same site was hit more than once, with one attacker replacing the code left by another. That makes the campaign harder to clean up and shows how attractive compromised Ghost sites have become for abuse.

For site owners, the advice is straightforward. Ghost should be updated immediately, all credentials should be rotated, and site logs should be reviewed for suspicious admin API activity. Any injected scripts should be removed from the database itself, not just from the visual editor. Visitors who may have reached a poisoned site should also be warned.

The report includes Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) for the attacks observed by the researchers.

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Ghost CMS)







Source link