The Invisible Frontline: How encrypted networks and AI are rewiring Britain’s security
Encrypted networks and artificial intelligence are enabling new forms of decentralized mobilization. Britain’s institutions must learn to track behavior, not just words.
When a Telegram channel created only hours before a protest swelled from a few dozen members to thousands—sharing maps, live videos and minute-by-minute instructions—the unrest that followed looked less like a spontaneous gathering and more like an operation rehearsed in secret.
This kind of rapid escalation reflects a shift in mobilization logic, where encrypted platforms enable fast-forming coordination that prioritizes speed, anonymity, and adaptability over formal organization or leadership.
Incidents like this have become increasingly common across Britain’s towns and cities in 2025, reflecting a broader pattern of digital mobilization that is testing how the country anticipates and responds to disorder.
I call this pattern Digital Insurgency—a hybrid mode of mobilization that blends insurgent tradecraft, online anonymity and rapid coordination across encrypted platforms.
It is not an organization but a behavior: fast-forming, decentralized coordination that can serve any cause or crime. The same coordination logic is used by activists, criminals and extremists alike—decentralized organization, disciplined migration between platforms and rapid amplification.
This matters because it undermines the way Britain’s security institutions currently detect and respond to unrest. When coordination is fast-forming, decentralized, and encrypted, threat assessment based on ideologies, visible leadership, or organizations arrives too late. A more effective response requires shifting from incident-driven enforcement toward earlier recognition of behavioral coordination patterns—without expanding censorship or mass surveillance.
From Protest To Pattern
Recent unrest linked to online coordination shows how public networks and encrypted channels now feed each other, shrinking the time institutions have to verify or respond.
Information, instructions, and narratives move rapidly between open platforms and encrypted channels, allowing coordination to scale publicly while planning and adjustment remain concealed. This convergence leaves institutions with little time to validate intent or disrupt activity before events spill into the public domain.
The same behavior has been observed in digital crime. The 2024 ransomware attack on Synnovis, an NHS pathology provider, disrupted patient care and exposed data—turning a cyber intrusion into a public crisis.
What makes the Synnovis incident relevant is not the intrusion itself, but how coordinated digital activity amplified its impact—rapidly transforming a technical cyberattack into a public crisis. In doing so, it demonstrates how decentralized coordination can escalate localized events into broader systemic disruption.
Speed, coordination and narrative pressure now shape both activism and extortion.
While the actors and motivations vary—from cybercriminals to extremists and protest movements—the coordination methods increasingly overlap, blurring the boundaries between domains that policing and policy teams have traditionally treated as distinct.
For years, policing and policy teams treated terrorism, organized crime and influence operations as separate domains.
Digital technology has blurred those boundaries. Dark-web marketplaces borrow from insurgent logistics; extremist movements use smuggling-style networks; propaganda fuses politics and marketing. Profit and ideology now coexist in the same online ecosystems, making disruption less about motive than about method.
Together, these shared digital ecosystems create an enabling environment in which decentralized actors—regardless of motive—can adopt insurgent-style coordination, learn from one another’s methods, and operate below traditional thresholds of attribution and enforcement.
Britain’s Blind Spots
Two weaknesses leave the UK especially exposed.
These weaknesses are structural rather than episodic, reflecting how institutions are organized to respond to discrete incidents rather than to anticipate and analyze emerging patterns of coordination.
First, responses remain incident-driven. Arrests and flashpoints prompt action, but little effort goes into understanding the ecosystem that produces them. What looks like a one-off event is often a repeatable, platform-driven chain reaction.
Second, analysis still privileges content over behavior. Legislation such as the Online Safety Act has rightly pushed platforms to police illegal and harmful material. What remains underdeveloped is the capacity to analyze the behavioral coordination behind fast-moving mobilization—the patterns that precede incidents.
Tracking those signals offers earlier warning than content moderation alone.
AI as Accelerant and Defense
Artificial intelligence accelerates both sides of this contest. Generative tools create convincing personas, translate messages at scale and flood platforms with near-identical variations that slip past automated filters. Deepfakes and synthetic audio lower the cost of deception. Yet the same technology can strengthen defense.
The National Cyber Security Centre has publicly assessed how AI is reshaping the cyber threat and has issued guidance on building and defending AI systems. Those insights now need to reach policing and civic institutions faster. The contest is one of speed: attackers prototype in days; institutions often react in months.
If this gap persists, small and loosely connected actors will continue to outpace centralized institutions, exploiting delay to test tactics, refine coordination, and normalize disruption before countermeasures are in place. Over time, this dynamic rewards adaptive behavior and erodes deterrence, making rapid coordination—rather than scale or capability—the decisive advantage.
Emerging decentralized communication tools—some enhanced by AI for anonymity and automation—further complicate attribution and response. These hybrid actors operate in a gray zone: below the threshold of open conflict but beyond the reach of traditional enforcement.
How To Respond Without Becoming The Society We Fear
A democratic response must be smart, transparent and proportionate. Four priorities stand out:
- Track behavior, not only speech. Invest in tools that measure coordination across platforms—when and how messages spread, not just what they say—shifting detection away from incident-driven response toward earlier recognition of emerging mobilization patterns.
- Map convergence zones. Identify intersections where darknet markets, encrypted apps and public forums share data and logistics; these are breeding grounds for hybrid operations, addressing institutional blind spots created by siloed monitoring and fragmented jurisdiction.
- Use AI defensively and ethically. Systems should be auditable and overseen by humans, flagging patterns for analysts rather than automating removals—countering both scale disadvantages and bias introduced by purely content-based enforcement.
- Break institutional silos. Treat crime, extremism and influence operations as overlapping domains requiring joint analysis and lawful rapid response. The Prevent strategy, for instance, can evolve by pairing narrative monitoring with behavioral analytics—reducing delays caused by domain-specific mandates and slow coordination between agencies.
These steps are not about censorship or surveillance theatre. They’re about giving democratic institutions the situational awareness they need to see patterns before incidents spiral.
A healthy democracy must tolerate dissent; the goal is to prevent the weaponization of technology that turns grievance into orchestrated disorder.
Seeing The Next Wave
If Britain continues reacting incident by incident, it will remain on the back foot.
If it adopts a mindset of pattern recognition, it can close a dangerous blind spot and protect both public order and civil liberty.
The next wave—driven by encrypted platforms and AI-assisted deception—will arrive faster and leave fewer traces for investigators to follow. Recognizing the behavioral logic of this new Digital Insurgency is the first step toward meeting it with the agility and accountability that democracy demands.
Check out all the great things Small Wars Journal has to offer.
The post The Invisible Frontline: How encrypted networks and AI are rewiring Britain’s security appeared first on Small Wars Journal by Arizona State University.