TL;DR
Andreessen Horowitz published a proposal on November 12, 2026, for a White House-led effort to protect key operators and vendors in five critical infrastructure sectors. It calls for CEO commitments, 72-hour manual-operation drills and monthly scorecards, but no government adoption or funding has been announced.
Andreessen Horowitz published a proposal on November 12, 2026, calling for a White House-led cyber defense effort focused on key operators and shared vendors in five critical sectors: power, banking and payments, water, communications and hospitals. The plan would ask sector CEOs to sign security targets, including passing 72-hour manual-operation drills; it is a proposal, not an adopted government program.
Get business pricing on tech for your team
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
The framework, titled “Super Intelligence-Era Critical Infrastructure Cyber Defense Plan,” was written by Anne Neuberger, an a16z general partner and head of global affairs. The firm says Neuberger also outlined the plan in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal. Its central premise is to prioritize a few hundred operators and shared vendors whose disruption, a16z argues, could have cascading effects across the country.
The proposal assigns the White House’s Super Intelligence Force responsibility for setting sector targets. A council of two or three CEOs per sector would commit to them, while existing industry information-sharing and analysis centers, or ISACs, would coordinate work and submit anonymized monthly scorecards. A sector that falls behind could face a CEO-level review. The council would meet with the president every six months and be publicly accountable for results, according to the plan.
The proposed targets are to eliminate internet-exposed control systems, pass drills that demonstrate 72 hours of manual operation, and contain critical vulnerabilities within a set period. The plan says its top-priority targets should be contained within six months. It also proposes a joint cross-sector exercise, modeled on GridEx, within three to six months. Replacing unsupported equipment could take two to five years, the plan says. These are proposed deadlines, not reported results.
The proposal’s focus is on the possibility that a disruption at a small number of operators or vendors could affect services used across sectors. Power, payment systems, water utilities, communications networks and hospitals support daily life and depend on technology that can be difficult to replace quickly. A shared set of targets and exercises could give companies and government agencies a way to compare preparedness and identify gaps, if adopted.
a16z frames artificial intelligence as accelerating both vulnerability discovery and exploitation, while also potentially helping defenders find exposed systems, prioritize risk and develop fixes. Those are claims in the proposal; it does not provide evidence that AI can deliver these outcomes at the speed or scale required. The plan itself describes speed of application as an open question.
The proposal also asks for a long-term reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 and considers a possible safe harbor for companies that meet outcomes-based targets. That would connect companies’ participation to legal protections, making the details of any legislation or safe harbor central to how the framework might work.
Products Worth Considering
LG UltraGear evo 27-inch 5K Mini-LED Gaming Monitor
Logitech MX Master 4 Ergonomic Wireless Mouse with Haptic Feedback, Graphite
Apple AirPods Pro 3 Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Federal Service to a16z
Neuberger previously worked at the National Security Agency and served as deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology, according to her account in the proposal. The document is directed to the White House’s Super Intelligence Force. President Donald Trump announced the task force on October 4, 2026, and named National Intelligence Director Jay Clayton to lead it, NBC News reported. Trump said the body would coordinate federal engagement with critical infrastructure providers and super intelligence companies.
The proposal describes a governance chain running from White House-set targets to CEO pledges, company drills, monthly ISAC reporting and presidential meetings. Its accompanying governance table is labeled “for illustrative purposes only,” and the source material presents the chain as a schematic of a proposed program, not an existing one.
a16z is a venture capital firm that invests in frontier AI labs and security companies. That gives the firm a stake in the policy environment around AI and cybersecurity, a relevant point for readers weighing its recommendations. The source material does not identify specific portfolio companies involved in drafting the plan or explain how potential conflicts would be managed.
“AI is shrinking the time between when a weakness is found and when it is exploited. Defenders who still work at human speed will lose that race.”
— Anne Neuberger, a16z general partner and head of global affairs, in the plan
Adoption, Costs and Legal Protections
No government decision to adopt the framework is reported in the source material. It also gives no cost estimate, funding plan or company-by-company list of the operators and vendors that would be covered. The precise targets, deadlines for each sector and method for verifying performance remain unspecified.
The proposal does not establish whether companies would be able to complete the drills or remove internet exposure within the suggested timelines, especially where equipment is unsupported. Nor does it spell out the terms of a possible safe harbor or the scope of any future reauthorization of the 2015 information-sharing law. a16z’s claims about AI’s effects on attack and defense timelines are not accompanied here by independent measurements.
White House Response and Implementation
The next step would be a decision by the White House and the Super Intelligence Force on whether to consider or adopt the framework. If officials proceed, the proposal points to CEO appointments, sector-specific targets, ISAC reporting arrangements and a cross-sector exercise within three to six months. Those milestones are part of a16z’s suggested schedule, not confirmed government commitments.
Any move toward implementation would also require clarity on costs, oversight, verification and the proposed legal protections. Until the administration or participating companies announce concrete actions, the plan remains a set of recommendations.
Key Questions
Has the U.S. government adopted a16z’s plan?
No adoption is reported in the source material. The framework is a proposal published by a16z.
Which sectors would the proposal cover?
It names power, banking and payments, water, communications and hospitals, with attention to operators and shared vendors whose failure could affect services more broadly.
What does the 72-hour drill involve?
The proposal calls for drills showing that priority operators can continue manual operations for 72 hours without IT. It does not report that any company has passed such a drill.
Who would oversee progress?
The plan assigns target-setting to the White House’s Super Intelligence Force, with sector CEOs accountable for results and ISACs submitting monthly anonymized scorecards.
How much would the plan cost?
The proposal provides no cost estimate or funding plan. It also leaves open how equipment upgrades and proposed legal protections would be paid for or structured.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
