About Author
Hannah Lloyd
Hannah Lloyd is CRO and co-founder of enhanced.io. She leads global new business generation and works directly with MSP partners to build and sell security practices.
enhanced.io, the channel-only Open XDR SOCaaS for MSPs
TL;DR
Manufacturing clients face cyber insurance questionnaires that are increasingly specific about operational technology, production system resilience and supply chain risk.
The controls insurers focus on for manufacturers go beyond the standard IT baseline: they ask about segregation between IT and OT networks, business continuity in the event of a production system outage, and supply chain security practices.
Most manufacturing clients have reasonable IT security. The gap tends to be in OT visibility, network segregation evidence and production continuity documentation.
An MSP supporting a manufacturing client through insurance renewal needs to understand which parts of the environment are in scope for the insurer's questions and which evidence gaps need to be addressed first.
The long-tail commercial opportunity here is significant. Manufacturing is a large sector, insurers are tightening requirements, and most MSPs serving manufacturers are not having this conversation proactively.
Manufacturing clients and cyber insurance: a conversation worth having
Here's something I've seen come up more and more in conversations with partners who serve manufacturing clients. The cyber insurance renewal arrives, the questionnaire is longer and more specific than it was two years ago, and the client asks their MSP for help completing it. What tends to happen next reveals quite a lot about the state of the relationship and the service. Some MSPs have the evidence ready. A lot of them don't, and they're not entirely sure which parts of the environment the questions are referring to.
Manufacturing is an interesting sector for this conversation because it straddles two worlds: the IT environment most MSPs are comfortable managing, and the operational technology environment of production systems, SCADA controllers, building management systems and industrial networks, where the MSP's visibility and tooling are often less mature. Insurers have started asking questions that probe both. And the evidence requirements for the OT side are quite different from the IT side.
The reason I mention this is not to suggest that MSPs serving manufacturers need to become OT security specialists overnight. It is to help frame where the specific gaps tend to be and what a practical approach to closing them looks like. In my experience, the manufacturing clients who go into insurance renewal in the best shape are the ones whose MSPs have had this conversation with them proactively, rather than the ones who are working through the questionnaire together for the first time at renewal.
What insurers focus on for manufacturing clients
IT and OT network segregation
This is the question that catches a lot of manufacturing clients unprepared. Insurers want to know whether the IT environment (user laptops, servers, Microsoft 365) is segregated from the OT environment (production systems, SCADA, industrial controllers). The concern is ransomware propagation: an attack that starts on the IT network and reaches production systems has a significantly higher business impact than one that stays within the IT environment.
The evidence the insurer wants is documentation of the network architecture showing the segregation, and confirmation of the controls that enforce it. Firewall rules between IT and OT segments, VLAN separation documentation and access control logs for crossing between environments are the most commonly requested. Manufacturing OT security threats in the context of insurance are primarily about whether a ransomware incident would halt production, and the segregation evidence directly addresses that question.
Production system resilience and recovery
Insurance questionnaires for manufacturers increasingly ask about recovery time objectives for production systems, not just IT infrastructure. How long would it take to restore production in the event of a ransomware attack? Is there a documented business continuity plan that covers production system outages? Have recovery procedures been tested?
This is an area where the MSP may not have full visibility. Production system recovery often sits with the client's engineering or operations team rather than with the IT function. But the insurer is asking the question and the client needs to answer it. An MSP who helps the client identify the right people to answer this part of the questionnaire and frames the documentation requirements clearly is providing genuine value, even if the technical work sits elsewhere.
Supply chain and third-party access
Manufacturing clients typically have suppliers, contractors and maintenance engineers who access their systems, sometimes remotely. Insurers ask about how third-party access is managed: are contractors given individual accounts or shared credentials, is remote access through a VPN with MFA enforced, and is there a process for revoking access when a contractor relationship ends. Why compliance matters for manufacturers in this context is partly about regulatory requirements and partly about the specific risk profile that third-party access creates in an environment where production systems are connected.
Ransomware resilience specifically
Ransomware targeting manufacturers is a documented and growing risk, and insurers are well aware of it. The specific questions tend to cover: immutable backups that cannot be encrypted by ransomware, tested recovery from backup, endpoint detection and response deployed across managed devices, and a documented process for isolating affected systems quickly. Demonstrating compliance around ransomware resilience for a manufacturing client means producing evidence for each of these areas, not just confirming they exist.
Building the evidence for manufacturing clients
From what I've seen, the most practical approach is to run a manufacturing-specific insurance readiness assessment 3 to 4 months before the renewal date. This gives time to identify and close the most significant gaps rather than documenting them after the fact.
The assessment covers 5 areas: IT and OT network segregation documentation, production system resilience and recovery planning, third-party and contractor access management, ransomware resilience controls, and the standard IT baseline that applies to all clients. Each area has a documentation requirement alongside the technical control. The gaps between what's in place and what insurers assess for manufacturing clients tend to fall into a consistent pattern, and the gap analysis produces a prioritized list of what needs to be addressed before the questionnaire is completed.
The OT visibility question is worth addressing directly, because it's where a lot of MSPs feel least confident. You don't need to be an OT security specialist to help a manufacturing client with their insurance renewal. You need to understand which questions on the questionnaire relate to OT environments, which parts of the client's environment those questions are asking about, and who within the client organization can provide the relevant documentation. In many manufacturing businesses, the operations manager or production engineer can answer the OT-related questions. Your role is to identify that and help structure the documentation, not to provide the technical OT answers yourself.
For manufacturing cybersecurity at a more technical level, the continuous monitoring piece is where an MSP's SOC capability adds most value. Continuous monitoring coverage across the IT environment, with documented evidence of alerts and responses throughout the year, directly answers the insurer's questions about detection capability. And it's evidence the client can produce immediately rather than reconstructing at renewal time.
The commercial conversation for MSPs
Manufacturing is a large sector with a lot of mid-market businesses that have reasonable IT setups and relatively under-developed security evidence practices. The cyber insurance renewal is a concrete, recurring commercial trigger, and the MSPs who help clients through it well are the ones who become genuinely embedded in the relationship.
What I've seen work is positioning the manufacturing insurance readiness assessment as a named service rather than something that happens informally when the renewal arrives. It has a clear output, a clear scope of work, and a direct commercial benefit for the client. And it naturally leads into a conversation about ongoing monitoring and reporting that keeps the client in good shape for next year's renewal too.
Does that make sense as a commercial framing for this sector? Because from what I've seen across the channel, the MSPs who have proactively built manufacturing as a focus area, rather than waiting for the client to raise the insurance question, are finding it one of the more productive vertical conversations they're having.
FAQ
How can a UK manufacturer evidence continuous security monitoring for a cyber insurance renewal without building a SOC?
The most practical route is to work with an MSP who provides managed security monitoring as a service and produces structured monthly reports that document alert activity, control coverage and incident resolution throughout the year. That reporting gives the manufacturer 12 months of continuous monitoring evidence to present at renewal without the overhead of building or running a SOC internally. The key is that the reporting is structured and consistent month to month, so it functions as an evidence trail rather than a series of ad hoc updates.
What does a cyber insurer want to see from a manufacturer specifically?
Beyond the standard IT baseline controls, insurers ask manufacturing clients about IT and OT network segregation, production system recovery planning and tested backup restoration, third-party and contractor access management with MFA enforcement, and ransomware resilience controls including immutable backups. The evidence requirements for these areas are documentation-based: network architecture diagrams, recovery test records, access review logs and backup test outcomes. The controls themselves may already be in place. The documentation is usually what needs work.
Do manufacturing clients need specialist OT security for insurance purposes?
Not necessarily for the purposes of passing an insurance questionnaire. What insurers are looking for in OT-related questions is evidence of network segregation between IT and OT environments, production system recovery planning, and awareness of the third-party access points into OT systems. These can be documented and evidenced without specialist OT security tooling in most SMB manufacturing environments. Where specialist OT security becomes more relevant is in larger or more complex environments where regulatory requirements like NIS2 apply to the manufacturing operations themselves.
How far in advance should an MSP start insurance renewal preparation for a manufacturing client?
In my experience, 3 to 4 months is the right lead time. That gives enough time to identify and close the most significant evidence gaps rather than just documenting them. The network segregation evidence and production recovery documentation tend to take the most time because they involve people outside the IT function. Starting at 6 weeks before renewal tends to create time pressure that results in incomplete questionnaire responses or promises to follow up with documentation that then gets lost in the process.
What is the most common gap for manufacturing clients in insurance questionnaires?
From what I've seen, it's the IT and OT network segregation documentation. Most manufacturing clients have some degree of separation between their IT and production networks, but relatively few have it documented in a way that clearly shows the architecture, the controls enforcing the separation and the process for managing exceptions. The second most common gap is production system recovery planning: the IT backup and recovery is usually documented, but the production system recovery time objectives and tested procedures rarely are.
Is manufacturing-specific cyber insurance different from standard business cyber insurance?
Cyber insurance policies for manufacturers often include specific coverage considerations for business interruption from production system outages, which is not a standard feature of all policies. The questionnaires reflect this: they ask about production system risk specifically because the potential claim value from a manufacturing stoppage is significantly higher than from an IT-only incident. MSPs serving manufacturing clients are worth familiarizing themselves with these policy-specific requirements, even at a high level, because it helps frame the insurance readiness conversation in terms the client's finance and operations teams understand.