President Trump signed executive orders targeting former officials from his administration, including Christopher Krebs and Miles Taylor, as well as the law firm Susman Godfrey. The orders, which were signed in April 2025, seek to investigate these individuals for their roles in opposing Trump’s claims about the 2020 presidential election. Krebs, who oversaw election security, was dismissed by Trump after he refuted allegations of widespread fraud. The orders revoke the security clearances of both Krebs and Taylor and also direct investigations into their actions during Trump’s presidency. Trump accused Krebs of treasonous conduct for defending the integrity of the election, while Taylor criticized the orders as an attack on dissent.
Reuters reports that the cybersecurity industry has largely remained silent after President Donald Trump took action against SentinelOne, a prominent cybersecurity firm, by ordering the cancellation of security clearances for its executives. Despite reaching out to thirty-six cyber organizations, only one responded in support of SentinelOne. The industry appears hesitant to speak out, with experts indicating that the risks of retaliation are too high. Trump’s actions against SentinelOne are linked to the company’s hiring of Chris Krebs, the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Following these events, SentinelOne’s share price dropped by seven percent, reflecting growing concerns within the industry. The Cyber Threat Alliance was the only group to publicly denounce the White House’s actions, calling them an example of government overreach. As noted by a cybersecurity executive, the fear of retaliation looms large, leaving many in the industry reluctant to voice their opinions.
SentinelOne, in a published statement, emphasized its commitment to defending customers, enterprises, and governments against cyber threats using advanced artificial intelligence. The company, which has fewer than ten employees under review, stated that it will cooperate with any government-mandated security clearance evaluations. SentinelOne reassures stakeholders that it does not foresee any material impact on its business operations.
Why do we care?
When a sitting president targets a cybersecurity firm for hiring a former official, it sets a dangerous precedent. Regardless of political affiliation, weaponizing government processes like security clearance revocation threatens the perception of neutrality in cybersecurity—an industry that relies on cross-sector trust and apolitical collaboration.
Out of 36 cybersecurity organizations, only one—Cyber Threat Alliance—publicly spoke out. That’s not just risk aversion; it shows how vulnerable the ecosystem is to political pressure.
Don’t wait for this to escalate—evaluate exposure to SentinelOne and other vendors tied to political controversy.Make sure you have contingency plans and tier-two vendor options.
This is a high-alert moment in cybersecurity—and a reminder that technology decisions are no longer politically neutral. If you’re not scenario-planning for political risk in your vendor stack, you’re behind.
