Rising production costs and disruptive trade policies push companies to rethink how and where they manufacture goods. In the wake of recent U.S. tariffs – notably the 2025 “Liberation Day” tariffs – many firms are accelerating automation on their assembly lines rather than reshoring jobs in large numbers​. These tariffs, intended to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., have raised the cost of imported components and labor, altering the cost-benefit equation for automation. As Oxford economist Carl Benedikt Frey notes, higher domestic costs create “an even stronger economic incentive to find ways of automating even more tasks.” In practical terms, if a company must move production from a low-wage country to a higher-cost country (or pay steep import fees), investing in robotics and AI can suddenly make more financial sense. Indeed, economists like Daron Acemoglu predict that if such tariffs persist, companies “have no choice but to bring some of their supply chains back home – but they will do it via AI and robots.”

This trend goes beyond tariff pressures. Global supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and increased wages (both abroad and at home) are all contributing factors. Leading U.S. firms and their international partners – from tech giants like Apple to auto manufacturers and logistics companies – are doubling down on automation to maintain competitiveness. Mid-sized manufacturers are following suit as advanced robotics become more affordable and easier to implement. The result is a cross-sector surge in automation that touches industries from manufacturing and logistics to agriculture, construction, and healthcare.

This article explores how major companies are automating assembly lines and operations in response to these economic pressures. We assess the implications of this shift for supply chain security, intellectual property (IP) protection, and physical and operational security. Finally, from a Chief Security Officer’s (CSO) perspective, we provide guidance on evolving security programs – covering physical security, cybersecurity, and operational resilience – to keep pace with a highly automated environment.

Leading companies have invested in automation for years, but the climate has markedly accelerated these efforts. Below is a snapshot of how some large and mid-sized firms are advancing automation in their production lines:

Apple is a prime example of a U.S.-based company pushing automation in overseas assembly lines. After highly publicized labor disputes at its contract manufacturer’s factories in China, Apple reportedly told its manufacturing partners to “reduce the number of workers on iPhone final assembly lines by as much as 50%” in the coming years​. This marked a shift from Apple’s hesitance to automating (due to high up-front costs) entirely. The company is willing to invest hundreds of millions annually to integrate advanced robotics and AI into iPhone production​. The goals are to minimize dependency on volatile human labor pools, safeguard production from pandemic-like disruptions, and potentially relocate more assembly to regions with stronger IP protection.

Notably, Apple’s primary assembler, Foxconn (Hon Hai Precision), has been driving this change: Foxconn’s CEO announced plans to automate 70% of assembly tasks, saying that in an environment of “rising costs and labor shortages, the company must move toward automation.”​ Foxconn even committed $40 million to a U.S. robotics R&D center and has been deploying “Foxbots” in its factories, underscoring that automation is now a non-negotiable trend to remain competitive.

In the automotive sector, automation has been standard for decades, but it’s reaching new heights. Ford Motor Company recently built a fully modernized body assembly line for its next-gen Ranger. It uses 493 coordinated robots for welding and assembly – achieving speed and consistency impossible with manual labor alone​. Ford explicitly noted that a “much higher level of automation” was “essential” to hit its production target of 200,000 vehicles/year at that plant​. Rival Tesla took a famously automation-first approach in its Fremont and Gigafactory plants, installing hundreds of robots in assembly and even attempting an ambitious (if problematic) “lights-out” production of the Model 3. While Tesla learned that some balance of human oversight is still needed, the company continues to innovate in factory automation (even prototyping humanoid robots to perform complex tasks in the future).

Traditional automakers are also expanding the use of collaborative robots that work alongside humans for tasks like precision assembly and quality inspection​. All are motivated by similar factors: maintaining output and quality while controlling labor costs and adapting to any tariffs on imported parts (for instance, a 25% tariff on auto components from certain countries could significantly raise costs, which firms aim to counter by improving efficiency​.

Critically, it’s not just the giants – mid-sized manufacturers are also increasingly automating. Advances in AI and robotics mean that even smaller firms can deploy robots without years of custom engineering.

The rise of flexible, AI-driven robots and subscription-based robotics services has “democratized” automation for smaller companies. For example, collaborative robot arms that can be easily programmed for tasks like machine tending or packing now have payback periods as short as 6 months in a mid-size factory setting​. This means a broader range of companies can justify automation to offset higher domestic wages or mitigate worker shortages. In short, the barrier to entry for automation has lowered, and economic pressures are providing the final push needed for broad adoption.

While manufacturing firms lead the charge, the automation wave is sweeping through many sectors in response to labor and cost challenges:

Implications: Across all these sectors, the shift toward automation enhances productivity and mitigates the impact of rising costs. Companies that successfully automate can “streamline operations and stay competitive” even when facing higher wages or input prices​. At a macro level, tariffs are acting as a catalyst: “Tariffs… are now a driver pushing industries toward increased adoption of autonomous robots and drones,” as one analysis notes​. By raising the cost of imported goods and labor, tariffs make the ROI of automation more attractive​. Many enterprises would rather invest in robots that can work 24/7 than pay a premium for reshored manual labor or costly imports. We are also seeing a convergence of trends: labor shortages (whether farmhands, factory workers, or nurses) coincide with cheaper and more intelligent robots, creating a fertile environment for automation.

However, this broad adoption of automation is not without significant side effects and risks. The following sections delve into what these highly automated operations mean for security – from securing supply chains and IP to protecting the physical and cyber ’ physical and cyber integrity.

As assembly lines and operational workflows become more automated, organizations must contend with a new landscape of security considerations. Below, we assess the implications of supply chain security, intellectual property protection, and physical/operational security.

However, there are new challenges, too. Automated operations heavily depend on technology – sensors, industrial computers, specialized software – and much of this tech is part of global supply chains. For instance, an automated factory might rely on servomotors from Japan, vision systems from Germany, and chips from Taiwan. Tariffs on these can raise costs or cause delays, possibly forcing companies to use subpar alternatives​. It is more worrisome if a critical component has a hidden vulnerability (a defective part or a malicious backdoor in software). It could threaten the entire automated system. There’s precedent: past cyber-attacks like Stuxnet targeted specific industrial control hardware in the supply chain to sabotage operations. Thus, supply chain security for automated systems must involve rigorous vetting of suppliers, requiring things like secure firmware, adherence to industry cybersecurity standards, and even Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) for automation software​. Some governments are mandating such measures for critical industries, knowing that a compromised robot or PLC (programmable logic controller) imported into a factory could be a Trojan horse. In sum, as companies automate, CSOs must treat automation components with the same scrutiny as any other part of the supply chain – to build redundancy, verify integrity, and stay alert to supplier risks.

That said, automation doesn’t eliminate IP risk; it transforms it. The crown jewels of IP – CAD drawings, assembly code, and algorithm recipes–are digitized and networked in highly automated facilities. The threat vector shifts to the cyber domain: a hacker breaching the factory network could exfiltrate the design files or machine instructions the robots use, effectively stealing the product blueprint. Or consider malicious insiders – whereas an assembly line worker might have only seen one piece of a product, an engineer managing an automated line may have access to the entire digital build plan.

Data security and access controls are therefore paramount. Companies must ensure that their manufacturing execution systems (MES), robotics controllers, and other digital systems are locked down. Techniques like encryption of design files, role-based access (so that no single technician can download all trade-secret data), and continuous network monitoring for suspicious activity are critical in an automated plant to prevent IP espionage. Another facet is vendor IP: as firms buy automation solutions (robots, AI software, etc.), they must safeguard their process knowledge. Contracts with robotics providers should clarify data ownership – e.g., if a machine vision system is learning from inspecting the company’s proprietary product, that data should not be shared or stored by the vendor without permission. In summary, automation can help reduce the human risk to IP, but it heightens the need for robust cybersecurity and digital rights management around sensitive design and process information. CSOs will want to collaborate closely with IT and engineering teams to maintain the secrecy of “digital twins” and recipes that the automated process uses.

However, a largely automated operation introduces new physical vulnerabilities. For one, the equipment becomes a high-value target – either for theft (advanced robots or specialized tools might be stolen for their resale value or underlying technology) or sabotage. An intruder or disgruntled insider could physically damage critical robots, sensors, or servers, knowing that would instantly halt production. Since these machines are expensive, even minor vandalism could incur huge costs and downtime.

Operational security – in the sense of keeping the plant running safely – also becomes trickier. Complex automation has a brittle side: if one piece of the system fails, it can cause cascading downtime because there may be no quick manual workaround. Consider a fully automated warehouse: if the fleet management software or the network goes down, hundreds of robots might stop moving, and the facility comes to a standstill. Guy Courtin of Tecsys Inc. points out that all machines being interconnected “opens us up to many more nodes of connectivity that could potentially be a threat.” Hackers will exploit any vulnerability​ – a stark reminder that a single weak link (even something like an IoT climate control system) can be an entry point to disrupt operations​. There’s also the issue of power security. Automated factories consume enormous electricity; a power outage of even 30 minutes “can cause mayhem” and lost production​. Unlike a manual operation where people might keep working with some backup tools, robots sit idle in an outage. Therefore, these facilities need robust backup power and electrical infrastructure to ensure continuity.

Safety is a part of physical security, too. Robots can pose hazards if not adequately safeguarded – for example, an autonomous machine could collide with a person, or an automated chemical process could run awry without human intervention. Ensuring the physical safety and security of employees who work alongside automation (such as maintaining robots or working in a partially automated line) is paramount. This means well-designed safety systems: light curtains, emergency stop mechanisms, isolated robot work cells, and clear human-robot interaction protocols. A malfunctioning robot is not just a productivity risk but potentially life-threatening if it swings out of control. There have been incidents historically of workers injured by robotic machinery; hence, as automation increases, safety engineering and oversight must keep pace, forming a core part of operational security.

Increased automation requires a holistic upgrade to physical and operational security practices. The facility’s access control, surveillance, and response plans must be tuned to protect machines and humans. Contingency planning becomes vital—how do you respond if a critical robot goes offline or a cyber-physical attack stops all conveyor belts? A company's operational resilience is stress-tested in a highly automated scenario; those that prepare with redundancies and rapid response protocols will weather incidents far better than those that assume the robots will never fail.

Next, we will turn to explicit strategies that a CSO and security team should consider to secure these new environments.

From a CSO’s perspective, the rise of automation calls for proactive evolution of the corporate security program. Security leaders should develop a multifaceted strategy spanning physical safeguards, cybersecurity controls, and operational resilience measures. Below is a breakdown of key strategies in each domain:

Even in a world of robots, physical security remains foundational. CSOs should ensure that facilities with automated systems are as secure as those with conventional operations – if not more so. Access control is the first line of defense: strictly limit who can enter automated production areas, especially after-hours. Fewer staff may be needed on-site, so visitors or non-essential personnel must be escorted. Technologies like biometrics or RFID badges can be used to track precisely who enters sensitive zones (e.g., a robotics control room or server area). Many companies integrate their building management with the automation system – for instance, robots might only activate when certain authorized personnel have badged in to supervise, preventing unauthorized use.

Additionally, surveillance and intrusion detection should be enhanced. Consider deploying smart cameras, motion detectors, and even drone patrols in large warehouses since robots won’t notice an intruder the way a human worker might. Modern AI security cameras can detect unusual activities (like someone in an area they shouldn’t be or after-hours movement) and alert security personnel. For remote or lights-out facilities, having a 24/7 remote monitoring center is crucial – security staff should be able to observe remotely and even intercom into the facility if something is amiss. In some cases, robots can assist with security: companies are experimenting with patrol robots that roam facilities at night and drones that do perimeter surveillance. These can complement traditional human guards.

Physical security planning must also account for equipment protection and safety. Key production equipment (robots, control panels, etc.) should be in secured enclosures or cages to prevent tampering. Lockout mechanisms can be installed to shut down machinery if a secure enclosure is opened without authorization. It’s wise to maintain spares or replacement units for critical robots or components stored securely so that if one unit is damaged (whether by accident or malicious act), it can be swapped with minimal downtime. From a safety standpoint, ensure all emergency stop buttons and interlocks are tested frequently. Conduct regular drills with the operations team for scenarios like “robot malfunction causing hazard” or “intruder in the facility” so that security and operations know how to respond quickly.

Lastly, collaboration with operations is key. The CSO’s team should work closely with plant managers and engineers to understand where physical vulnerabilities might lie. For example, if a particular gate to the loading dock is often left open for deliveries, that’s a risk to address. If maintenance staff need after-hours access to fix a robot, ensure there’s a secure protocol (like verifying identity via CCTV before remotely unlocking a door). By blending traditional physical security best practices with the unique needs of an automated site, companies can prevent the majority of physical security incidents from occurring – and be ready to respond to the rest.

Cybersecurity is mission-critical in highly automated environments. The convergence of IT (information technology) and OT (operational technology) means that a breach can have immediate physical consequences. A CSO must assume that any system connected to the network—from a warehouse robot to an HVAC sensor—could be an entry point for attackers. Thus, a robust cybersecurity strategy tailored to industrial settings (often called Industry 4.0 or ICS security) is essential.

Network segmentation and zero-trust principles should be implemented. The production network where robots and PLCs communicate should be strictly segmented from the corporate office network and the internet. If remote access is needed (for engineers or vendors to support systems), use VPNs with multi-factor authentication and tightly limit privileges. Treat every device on the OT network as untrusted until verified. For example, if a new robotic arm is added, it should be placed in a quarantined VLAN until it’s patched and scanned for vulnerabilities. Use firewalls to safelist only the necessary communications between the industrial network and business systems (e.g., sending production data to an ERP system), blocking everything else.

Next, deploy specialized intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) for industrial protocols. Many vendors offer anomaly-detection tools for factory networks to spot unusual commands or traffic patterns that might indicate a hacker or malware. Since normal operations are relatively repetitive, these systems can be very effective at catching a Stuxnet-like attack before it does damage. Regularly update and patch all software and firmware in the automation environment – this is challenging because downtime is costly, but ignoring updates can leave known holes open. A balanced approach is to schedule frequent but brief maintenance windows to apply security patches to robots, controllers, and servers. If a particular machine cannot be patched (perhaps an older control system), isolate it and consider virtual patching (monitoring and filtering its traffic for malicious activity).

Another key aspect is endpoint security for industrial endpoints. Ensure all HMIs (Human-Machine Interfaces), engineering workstations, and control servers have up-to-date anti-malware and application-safe listing. Safelisting is powerful in OT: these systems generally run a fixed set of applications, so blocking anything not pre-approved can stop malware from executing. Also, limit the use of removable media (USB drives) on the plant floor, as those have been common infection vectors; use encrypted and approved devices if files must be transferred, and scan them in a safe environment first.

Crucially, cybersecurity extends to the data and IP in the automated process—encrypting sensitive design files at rest and in transit within the network. Use digital signing to ensure that any code sent to a machine (like a CNC machine’s program or a robot’s instructions) is from a trusted source and hasn’t been altered. Monitor user access: implement fine-grained access controls so that engineers can only access the necessary systems. Every action on critical systems should be logged and regularly audited. This helps in forensic analysis if something goes wrong and deters insider mischief when employees know their actions are recorded.

Given the complexity, security awareness and training for IT staff and engineers are vital. OT engineers may not be security experts, so train them not to expose control systems to the internet or avoid default passwords on equipment. Likewise, IT security staff should learn about industrial processes to tailor solutions appropriately (for instance, understanding that a robot might have safety issues if scanned aggressively). Bridging the gap between these teams will create a culture where securing robots is as natural as securing laptops.

Finally, an incident response plan specifically for cyber-physical incidents should be developed. This plan should answer questions like: How do we safely halt the automated line if we suspect a cyber-attack? Who needs to be alerted (operations, maintenance, etc.)? How do we recover systems and ensure they’re safe before restarting? By practicing these responses, a CSO can ensure that if the worst happens – ransomware hits the factory network – the team can contain the incident without panic and get things running again with minimal harm to people or IP.

Cybersecurity in automated environments must be preventive, detective, and responsive. It’s about hardening every layer (devices, network, applications, people) and preparing for an attack that might eventually slip through. Those who invest in these measures will significantly lower the risk of disruptions and data breaches in their smart factories and warehouses.

Operational resilience is the capacity to keep critical services running (or to recover quickly) in the face of disturbances. In a highly automated operation, resilience needs special attention because the interdependence of systems can amplify the impact of any single failure. A CSO, working with other executives like the COO and CIO, should champion a comprehensive resilience program that includes risk assessment, contingency planning, and continuous improvement.

Here are key strategies for operational resilience in automated environments:

By implementing these strategies, a CSO and their team can significantly enhance their organization’s ability to withstand and quickly recover from disruptions in a highly automated operation.

The march toward automation in response to economic pressures – from tariff “Liberation Day” shocks to labor market shifts – reshapes how companies operate their assembly lines and supply chains. U.S.-based firms and their global partners are harnessing robotics, AI, and autonomous systems at an unprecedented scale to cut costs, boost productivity, and maintain flexibility in uncertain times. This trend spans industries, promising safer, more efficient manufacturing, logistics, farming, construction, and healthcare operations. A factory can run through the night with robot labor; a warehouse can ship orders in minutes with automated sorters; a tractor can till fields autonomously; and a hospital can dispatch a robot to deliver meds – all these scenarios are becoming routine.

Yet, as we’ve explored, these advances bring consequential implications for security. Supply chains become simultaneously more local (improving control) and more digitally intertwined (raising the stakes of cybersecurity). Intellectual property might be better shielded from human prying eyes, but it lives in systems that hackers may target. The physical and operational security paradigms shift to managing “smart” infrastructure – where a breach or breakdown can have immediate, costly ripple effects.

The mission is clear for chief security officers and business leaders: enable automation gains while safeguarding the enterprise’s assets, people, and continuity. A proactive security program that evolves with these technological changes is not just advisable but essential. This means investing in cutting-edge cybersecurity for industrial systems, retraining security and operations teams, and collaborating across departments to ensure security is baked into every new automation initiative (rather than bolted on later).

Encouragingly, many organizations are rising to this challenge. They conduct thorough risk assessments before deploying automation and entering a new market. They insist on security features in new equipment (for example, choosing robotics vendors that offer encryption and robust access controls by design). They are fostering a culture of resilience so that the company can adapt and keep moving forward, whether it’s a tariff jolt, a supply hiccup, or a cyber incident.

Ultimately, the drive to automate bolsters competitiveness and efficiency in a global landscape that rewards agility. Security and automation must go hand-in-hand. By following the strategies outlined – from securing supply chains to hardening cyber defenses and building resilient operations – companies can confidently embrace the benefits of automation. The assembly lines of tomorrow may be filled with robots and guided by AI, but with prudent planning, their supply chains will be secure, their intellectual property guarded, and their operations robust against whatever challenges arise. This balance of innovation and security will define the winners in the following industry phase. In this phase, automation and security are not opposing forces but complementary pillars of sustainable success.

Sources: