Tank terminal cybersecurity has moved from IT afterthought to board-level priority in 2026, as ransomware groups and state-linked actors increasingly target the automated tank gauging (ATG), SCADA, and custody transfer systems that keep bulk liquid storage running. The 2021 Colonial Pipeline attack remains the reference point for the sector, but CISA has since flagged repeated intrusions into oil and gas ICS/SCADA environments, many exploiting exposed remote access and default credentials rather than sophisticated tradecraft.
Flat OT networks and unencrypted industrial protocols leave storage terminals exposed. Operators are responding by deploying specialist platforms that deliver passive asset visibility, network segmentation, and continuous threat monitoring without risking downtime on live custody transfer operations.
How We Ranked the Top 10 Tank Terminal Cybersecurity Providers
This tank terminal cybersecurity ranking weighs three factors: native support for industrial protocols used in midstream operations (Modbus, DNP3, OPC), proven deployment across terminal, pipeline, or refinery environments, and the ability to map platform output to regulatory frameworks including the TSA Security Directives for oil and gas pipelines and the EU’s NIS2 directive.
1. Dragos
Dragos built its platform around threat intelligence gathered from analysts tracking groups that specifically target industrial safety systems, including Xenotime. For terminal operators, the Dragos Platform maps midstream OT architecture and monitors SCADA networks across remote sites, with incident response playbooks built around pipeline and storage ransomware scenarios rather than generic enterprise breach response.
2. Claroty
Claroty’s xDome platform uses passive network monitoring to catalogue terminal assets, PLCs, RTUs, and HMIs, without disrupting active fluid transfer. Its deep packet inspection extends to automated tank gauging and custody transfer protocols, giving operators visibility into the systems that calculate product volumes and trigger financial settlement, a niche few competitors cover in depth.
3. Nozomi Networks
Nozomi Networks Guardian decodes midstream industrial protocols natively, allowing terminal engineers to flag unauthorised command changes sent to product pumps, automated valves, and safety systems in near real time. The platform’s on-premise deployment option matters for operators reluctant to route tank-level data through third-party cloud infrastructure.
4. Honeywell Connected Enterprise
Honeywell builds much of the physical DCS and safety instrumentation running in refineries and LNG terminals, which gives its security services unusual credibility in these environments. Operators running legacy Honeywell Experion systems, or third-party DCS platforms alongside them, use Honeywell for assessments that account for the physical consequences of a misjudged vulnerability scan.
5. TXOne Networks
TXOne fields hardware-enforced inline tools such as EdgeFire and EdgeIPS, positioned directly in front of vulnerable ATG systems to vet commands in real time. Its focus on ruggedised appliances for harsh oilfield and marine environments, alongside protection for unpatchable legacy Windows terminal management software, addresses a gap most enterprise-first vendors ignore.
6. Fortinet OT Security Platform
Fortinet generated $6.8bn in revenue under chief executive Ken Xie, and its OT division supplies ruggedised firewalls built to withstand outdoor terminal and manifold environments. Its tools enforce micro-segmentation between corporate IT and the OT zones handling pipeline intake, backed by threat intelligence mapped to industrial protocols and virtual patching for unpatched legacy infrastructure.
7. Palo Alto Networks
With $9.2bn in revenue and Nikesh Arora at the helm, Palo Alto Networks blends next-generation firewalls with AI-driven threat detection across corporate and industrial networks. Its zero-trust approach extends to legacy 2G/3G protocol analysis, relevant for terminals still running remote pipeline pump stations and marine loading arms on older telemetry.
8. Tenable OT Security
Built on the legacy Indegy platform and now generating $999.4m in revenue under co-chief executives Steve Vintz and Mark Thurmond, Tenable OT Security alerts engineers whenever a device modifies configuration logic on a critical controller. That silent-tampering detection is directly relevant to terminals running safety-critical shutdown systems on ageing programmable logic controllers.
9. Industrial Defender
Industrial Defender specialises in automation compliance and configuration management, with reporting engines built explicitly for TSA Security Directives and NIS2. CISA has itself pointed operators toward vendors like Industrial Defender when responding to unsophisticated but damaging intrusions into oil and gas ICS environments, a rare direct regulatory endorsement in this space.
10. Waterfall Security Solutions
Waterfall’s unidirectional gateways use physical data diodes to ensure information flows only out of the terminal network. Historians can replicate tank-level data to business teams while the diode physically blocks any inbound path, an architecture particularly suited to isolating automated tank gauging systems from corporate network risk entirely rather than just monitoring for it.
The Future of Tank Terminal Cybersecurity: What to Watch in 2026
Tank terminal cybersecurity spend is set to keep climbing as more operators integrate terminal automation and cloud-connected terminal management systems, both of which widen the IT/OT attack surface even as they cut operating costs. Expect tighter alignment between vendor roadmaps and the CISA pipeline cybersecurity framework and the EU’s NIS2 directive through the rest of 2026, alongside growing demand for platforms that can prove compliance without requiring downtime on live custody transfer operations. Operators evaluating vendors should also track CISA’s ICS advisories, which increasingly name oil and gas-specific exploitation attempts.
Which provider is best for tank terminal cybersecurity overall?
Dragos and Claroty lead for midstream-specific deployments, given their focus on threat intelligence tailored to pipeline and terminal operations and deep support for custody transfer and tank gauging protocols respectively. The right choice depends on whether the priority is threat intelligence and incident response (Dragos) or asset visibility and secure remote access (Claroty).
What criteria determine this ranking?
Providers are ranked on native support for industrial protocols used in midstream operations (Modbus, DNP3, OPC), proven deployment history across terminal, pipeline, or refinery environments, and the ability to map platform output to regulatory frameworks such as the TSA Security Directives and NIS2.
Why are tank terminals a growing cyberattack target in 2026?
Terminals increasingly connect automated tank gauging, SCADA, and terminal management systems to corporate IT and cloud services to cut costs, widening the attack surface. CISA has documented repeated intrusions into US oil and gas ICS/SCADA environments, most exploiting weak passwords and exposed remote access rather than sophisticated techniques.
What’s the difference between Waterfall’s approach and platforms like Nozomi or Dragos?
Waterfall uses hardware data diodes to physically block inbound traffic, preventing intrusion rather than detecting it. Nozomi and Dragos take a monitoring approach, using passive network visibility to detect anomalies and unauthorised commands, which allows two-way data flow but relies on timely detection and response.
What could change these rankings in future?
Consolidation is the biggest risk to this list. Darktrace was acquired by Thoma Bravo in 2024, and further M&A among OT security vendors is likely through 2026 and 2027 as larger cybersecurity and industrial automation companies buy specialist capability rather than build it.