Draft, not yet released. In stewardship review. Not indexed until the first approved release.

Methodology

How the edition was made: methods, the model card, the evidence cut and its age, the acceptance record and the glossary.

12 min read0 figures13 tables10 notesNR-STRATEGIC-DPI-GLOBAL-2026-BASELINE

Contents
  1. ·Edition home
  2. ·Executive summary
  3. 1Digital systems fail together
  4. 2Key findings
  5. 3Systems and sectors at baseline
  6. 4Risks and capability
  7. 5Shared provider failure that overlaps a power or network loss
  8. 6Readings from the other desks
  9. 7The 2027 agenda
  10. 8Systems in depth
  11. AMethodology
    1. A.1 Methods
    2. A.2 Model card, Digital Public Infrastructure Model v0
    3. A.3 The baseline evidence cut
    4. A.4 Evidence age and coverage
    5. A.5 Evidence cards, two anchor sources
    6. A.6 Publication acceptance record
    7. A.7 Status words
    8. A.8 How the edition is made, released and corrected
    9. A.9 Glossary and abbreviations
    10. A.10 Technical annex
  12. BData appendix
  13. CReferences and record
  14. ·Complete edition, for print

A.1Methods

The global baseline uses published values and four simple derivations. Each is shown in full so that any reader can reproduce it.

Table A.1Methods
No.DerivationCalculationResult
(1)ENISA incidents per month in the period4,875 ÷ 12≈ 406
(2)Growth in UK nationally significant incidents204 ÷ 89≈ 2.3 times
(3)Duration of the AWS event, first impact to end11:48 PM to 2:20 PM PDT14 h 32 min, ≈ 14.5 h
(4)Duration of the Cloudflare event, first impact to full resolution11:20 to 17:06 UTC5 h 46 min, ≈ 5.8 h
Table A.2Coupling strength scale (matrix and model card)
StrengthDefinition
STRONGa disruption in the source system has historically changed the target system’s service or output within one season, in more than one region
MODERATEan effect is documented but buffered or slower
WEAKan effect is plausible but not documented at global scale
Table A.3Status grammar
LabelRule
Reportedvalue as issued by its source, with year
Inferredreasoned from cited evidence; never a measurement
EstimatedNexus analytical value with stated method
Scenarioconditional on stated assumptions
Expert inputstructured editorial judgement awaiting evidence

A.2Model card, Digital Public Infrastructure Model v0

Model ID
MDL-SR10-DPI · v0.1
Purpose
represent digital public infrastructure as a dependent stack and the mechanisms by which failures spread between identity, payments, data exchange, cloud, networks and the services that rely on them
Family
graph-based system of systems
Inputs
the cited sources of this edition; no proprietary data
Method
expert-specified coupling strengths (STRONG · MODERATE · WEAK) from assessments and analogue events
Validation
none yet, first validation against federation evidence in 2027
Uncertainty
qualitative; strengths are hypotheses, not measurements
Domain of validity
global scale; not for asset-, site- or country-level use
Reproducibility
strength table and sources published in this edition
20couplings

typed in v0

1strong

documented within one season

3moderate

documented, buffered

16weak

plausible, undocumented

A.3The baseline evidence cut

Every Nexus edition is published from a frozen evidence cut. The global baseline cut is documentary: it pins the exact edition of every source cited. Federation cuts begin with the first national Foundry cuts in 2027.

Cut ID
DC-STRATEGIC-DPI-GLOBAL-2026-B0
Type
baseline documentary cut
Resolution policy
pinned · as of 30 September 2026
Sources pinned
43 cited sources, each at the edition and access date in the references
Model runs
none at baseline, analytical values are stated with their method
Digest
computed at freeze and recorded in the publication record
Supersedes
nothing, first cut of the series
Superseded by
the 2027 digital public infrastructure annual cut

Lineage

  1. 01

    source edition

  2. 02

    pinned citation

  3. 03

    finding

  4. 04

    page

  5. 05

    publication record

Table A.4From the baseline cut to the federation cut
ElementBaseline 20262027 global annual
Sourcescited global publications, pinned by editionnational, regional and sector cuts through one graph
Analysisstated methods and editorial estimatestyped analysis specifications
ModelsDigital Public Infrastructure Model v0 specificationmodel runs with receipts
Findingstwelve baseline findingsfindings re-bound to federation evidence
Reviewfive passes scheduledfive passes on the exact digest

A.4Evidence age and coverage

A 2026 global edition rests on evidence observed in many different years. This page shows each time base, so that no single year label hides older evidence.

Table A.5Evidence age and coverage
IndicatorObservedReleasedCadenceNext release
Software outage2024Jul 2024one-offnone scheduled
Cloud eventOct 2025Oct 2025per eventnext provider report
Edge eventNov 2025Nov 2025per eventnext provider report
Cyber advisories2024 to 2025Feb 2024 · Aug 2025per eventnext joint advisory
EU incident countsJul 2024 to Jun 2025Oct 2025 · v1.3 Sep 2026annualnext ENISA report
UK incident countsSep 2024 to Aug 2025Oct 2025annualnext NCSC review
Connectivity2025Nov 2025annualnext ITU release
Account ownership20252025triennialnext Findex
Payment volumesOct 2025 · Dec 2025Nov 2025 · Dec 2025monthlynext monthly release
Event loss estimate2025Oct 2025per eventmay be revised
Table A.6Coverage by system at baseline
SystemCoverageThinnest dimension
Software and cloudPARTIALcross-provider dependency
NetworksPARTIALcross-operator dependency
IdentityTHINnational system coverage
PaymentsPARTIALoutage and fraud data
Data exchangeTHINcoverage beyond one country
Cyber threatPARTIALoperator-level data
Access and inclusionGOODidentity coverage by country
Event lossesTHINcommon loss basis
Table A.7Designed empty states: what is not bound, what would fill it and why
FieldSource that would fill itBlocker
Which public services depend on which shared digital rails, at national scaleoperators, regulators and national statistics officessecurity-sensitive and not published on a common basis
Restoration times for identity and payment services after major outagesoperator and regulator reportsnot retrieved; no consolidated series
ENISA sector breakdown and top threatsENISA Threat Landscape 2025 full report1the publication page was read; the PDF was not opened and the page notes corrected figures in version 1.3
Share of cloud and edge traffic by provider and regionproviders and network measurement bodiesnot retrieved
Outage and fraud data for national payment railscentral banks and payment bodiesonly volume reports were read; no incident series found
Official statistics pages for UPI and PixNPCI and Banco Central do Brasil1314official statistics pages returned no figures; values come from press reports of the official data
People without official identity from the dataset itselfWorld Bank ID4D Global Dataset26the repository returned an access error; the figure comes from search summaries
Number of individuals affected by the 2024 health claims platform breachUS Department of Health and Human Services breach portal28portal not opened; a later higher figure appears in a single press report only
Full text of the G20 declaration on digital public infrastructureG20 New Delhi Leaders Declaration27not opened; wording taken from press coverage
National inventories of identity, payment and data-exchange systemsnational authoritiesno common register found
Common loss basis for cyber eventsinsurers and event classifiersone classified event read; no series
Capability rungs beyond restorationoperators, regulators, ministriesnot reviewed

A.5Evidence cards, two anchor sources

Issued by the cloud provider. One-off. Role: binds DAT-002. Coverage: one region and services that rely on it. Times are stated in Pacific time.

EVD-SR10-001

AWS post-event summary on the October 2025 disruption4

Issued by the EU Agency for Cybersecurity. Annual. Role: binds CYB-007. Reporting period 1 July 2024 to 30 June 2025; the page notes corrections in version 1.3.

EVD-SR10-002

ENISA Threat Landscape 20251

Table A.8Quality dimensions at baseline
DimensionEVD-SR10-001EVD-SR10-002
Completenessevent-specific; customer impact varied within the windowincidents analysed; sector split not read
Timelinesspublished days after the eventabout 3 months after the period
Revisionsingle summaryversion 1.3 corrected figures
Method transparencyroot cause and timeline statedthreat-centric method stated
External validationprovider statementagency review

Evidence cards to follow in 2027

  • AWS4: service-level detail by customer region
  • ENISA1: sector breakdown of incidents
  • CISA67: follow-up advisories
  • NCSC8: sector pages of the annual review

A.6Publication acceptance record

Editorial self-check at evidence close. Every applicable item carries a disposition; the remaining items are review, approval and deposit.

Table A.9Publication acceptance record
GroupAreaItemsPassN/APending
D1Identity and scope8800
D2Source and data12912
D3Analysis and models12381
D4Findings and claims9801
D5Figures, tables, maps10622
D6Editorial and citations10802
D7Review and approval130013
D8Artefact and design12705
D9Registry and release9009

Publication gate

Conditions met
14 of 23 at evidence close
Blocking problems
none recorded
Open conditions
reviews, approval of the exact digest, deposit, registry pointer

Not applicable at baseline

Model runs
first runs in Q1 2027
Maps
plates in Q2 2027
Waivers
none

A.7Status words

Table A.10The status every value carries
StatusWhat it means
ObservedMeasured directly and published by the source.
ReportedPublished statistics of an official or institutional source.
DeclaredStated by the body concerned; not independently measured.
EstimatedA Nexus estimate from cited evidence, with its method in Annex A.
ModelledProduced by a stated model from cited inputs.
InferredReasoned from cited evidence; not measured.
ForecastA projection by the cited source.
SimulatedA simulation result under stated assumptions.
ScenarioA conditional statement under stated assumptions; never a prediction.
Expert inputExpert judgement, recorded with its basis.
CandidateProposed for a later edition; not yet evidence.
Evidence-quality levels (EQL 1 to 5) grade the source behind a value; they are not a score of the subject.

A.8How the edition is made, released and corrected

Every edition is built from a sealed evidence cut, reviewed under three keys, signed and deposited before any site shows it as published; corrections go to Nexus Standards as change proposals and feed the next cut.

StepWhat happensSource
01 Evidence arrives from the pillarsFoundry seals observations and indicator series, Universe hands over after-action and scenario findings, and contributions are screened at every gateway, including this site’s.
02 The cut is sealedOn the cut date the evidence is pinned under one identifier, so anyone can rebuild the edition from exactly what it was built on.
03 The edition is assembledThe edition is drafted from its template and content pack. Agents may draft; they never publish and never decide.
04 The keys turnAt the publisher of record the truth key comes first: every value is checked against its source or stated method before the meaning and capital keys turn. No edition moves on until every key has been turned by a named steward.
05 The gate opensA named approver releases one exact digest of the edition; any change after this point is a new version, never a silent edit.
06 Signed and depositedThe PDF, the web edition and the data bundle are signed together with a manifest and an RO-Crate description, and deposited on Zenodo with a concept and a version DOI.
07 Published on its desk’s siteOnly then does the edition show as published on its desk’s Reports site, and the Collection lists it as a part.
08 Corrections go to StandardsMethod and correction findings go to Nexus Standards as change proposals; citations, corrections and new contributions feed the next evidence cut.

A teaching model of the process, not a forecast and not a record of any run; dates and counts on this page come from the programme record. Sources: Reports governance at GCRI Canada (2026); Zenodo, repository of record for Reports deposits (2026).

Lifecycle, one state at a time: Draft, Computed, Evidence bound, Reviewed, Approved for release, Published, Corrected, Superseded. This edition is a draft.

A.9Glossary and abbreviations

Table A.11Series terms
TermMeaning
Baseline Editionthe inaugural annual edition that fixes the reference state for the series
WEFH+Bwater, energy, food, health and biodiversity, the national nexus core
Couplinga typed dependency through which one system transmits to another
Protection gapthe share of losses not covered by insurance
Capability ladderLISTED → EXISTS → ADEQUATE → TESTED → DEMONSTRATED
EQLevidence-quality level, 1–5
Evidence cuta frozen resolution of exact sources and versions
NNC · NLC · NWGNational Nexus Consortium · National Leadership Council · National Working Groups
Table A.12Abbreviations used in this edition
AbbreviationExpansion
CISAUS Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
CMCCyber Monitoring Centre
CSFCybersecurity Framework
DNSDomain Name System
DORADigital Operational Resilience Act
DPIdigital public infrastructure
ENISAEuropean Union Agency for Cybersecurity
ITUInternational Telecommunication Union
NCSCUK National Cyber Security Centre
NIS2second Network and Information Security Directive
NPCINational Payments Corporation of India
UPIUnified Payments Interface

A.10Technical annex

Table A.13Technical annex
ItemAnnexContentsStatus
A.1Indicator definitionsthe global indicator set, with units and sourcesIN THIS EDITION
A.2Coupling strengthsthe twenty-cell matrix and its rationaleIN THIS EDITION
A.3Scenario specificationSCN-SR10-DPI-01 assumptions and signpostsIN THIS EDITION
A.4Capability placementsrung evidence for fifteen functionsIN THIS EDITION
A.5Model diagnosticsfirst runs and validation2027
A.6Sensitivity analysesinfluence of coupling strengths2027
A.7Regional notesregional digital cardsWITH REGIONAL EDITIONS
A.8Review statementspass-by-pass review recordAT RELEASE

A.1 · indicator definition: nationally significant incident

Construct
a cyber incident that the national agency classes in the top three categories of its classification model
Unit
incidents per year
Method
incident management data of one national agency
Source
NCSC Annual Review8
Uncertainty
classification and reporting practice change over time
Known limits
one country; not comparable with counts from other agencies

Notes

Numbers are the edition’s reference numbers, so a note reads the same in every chapter. The full list, with every source and its licence, is in Annex C. Annex C, references

  1. 1ENISA (ed.), ENISA Threat Landscape 2025 (publication page; period 1 July 2024 to 30 June 2025; published 1 October 2025; 4,875 incidents; version 1.3 of 22 September 2026). European Union Agency for Cybersecurity, Athens. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  2. 13Entrackr, UPI hits all-time high of 20.7 bn transactions in October (press report of NPCI data: 20.7 billion transactions, Rs 27.28 lakh crore, up 25% and 16% year on year); the NPCI statistics page returned no figures. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  3. 14Agência Brasil, Pix bate recorde e supera 313 milhões de transações em um dia (press report of Banco Central do Brasil data: about 313.3 million transactions and R$ 179.9 billion on 5 December 2025; previous record 297.4 million on 28 November 2025); the central bank statistics page returned no figures. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  4. 26UNVERIFIED, not opened: World Bank (ed.), ID4D Global Dataset 2021, Volume 1: Global ID Coverage Estimates (just under 850 million people without official proof of identity in 2021; about half children; 194 countries), taken from search-result summaries; the repository returned an access error. World Bank, Washington, 2022. Observation year 2021. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  5. 28UNVERIFIED, not opened: US Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights, Change Healthcare cybersecurity incident (about 100 million notices sent by October 2024), taken from search-result summaries of HHS statements; a later figure of 192.7 million appears in one press report and is not used. Observation year 2024. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  6. 27UNVERIFIED, not opened: G20, New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration, 9 to 10 September 2023 (welcomed the G20 Framework for Systems of Digital Public Infrastructure and a global repository of digital public infrastructure), taken from press coverage of the declaration. Observation year 2023. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  7. 4Amazon Web Services (ed.), Summary of the Amazon DynamoDB service disruption in the Northern Virginia (US-EAST-1) Region, 19 to 20 October 2025 (post-event summary). Amazon Web Services, Seattle. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  8. 6CISA, NSA, FBI and partner agencies (eds.), Joint cybersecurity advisory AA24-038A on state-sponsored actor persistent access to critical infrastructure networks, 7 February 2024 (page text read to character 100,000 of 132,303). CISA, Arlington. Observation year 2024. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  9. 7CISA and partner agencies (eds.), Joint cybersecurity advisory AA25-239A on state-sponsored actor compromise of networks worldwide, 27 August 2025 (revised 3 September 2025). CISA, Arlington. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back
  10. 8National Cyber Security Centre (ed.), NCSC Annual Review 2025, incident management chapter and news item (period 1 September 2024 to 31 August 2025; 429 incidents; 204 nationally significant; 18 highly significant). NCSC, London. Observation year 2025. Accessed 2026-11-03.back

Cite this annex

Valadbaygi, S. (Ed.). (2026). Annex A: Methodology. In Strategic Systems Report 2026: Digital Public Infrastructure and Systemic Cyber Risk (Baseline Edition 2026, Report No. NR-STRATEGIC-DPI-GLOBAL-2026-BASELINE) [Draft under review]. The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI).

Every citation form of the whole report, BibTeX and RIS included, is on the edition home. Cite this report

ReportsContribute

Send evidence or a correction on Digital Public Infrastructure and Systemic Cyber Risk.

Reports is the Consortium’s quarterly publication, written by six desks. This page sits with the Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI) Systems Evidence desk. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work. Sent to the wrong desk, it is forwarded, not refused.

GCRI Systems Evidence deskStrategic Systems

CC BY 4.0 Free to read. Text and figures: CC BY 4.0. Data: CC0 1.0. Authors keep copyright. Published by GCRI Canada.

The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation

Science · evidence · measurement

Not for profit

Our articles, maps and twins are free to read and free to republish. Readers and partners keep it that way.

Partner with us

Who funds us

GCRI is a not-for-profit institution. To ask who funds a piece of work, use the funding questions form.

Independence

Editors and the expert reviewers named on each article decide what we publish. Funders and partners do not review or approve articles before publication.

Licence

Articles: CC BY 4.0. Figures, maps, twins and data: CC BY 4.0. Other uses: ask through the permissions form.