Cybersecurity in Agriculture Act of 2025
The Cybersecurity in Agriculture Act of 2025 would direct the U.S. Department of Agriculture, acting through the National Institute of Food and Agriculture and in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, to create a grant and cooperative agreement program for Agriculture Cybersecurity Centers. The bill calls for establishing five regional centers and a national network to coordinate them, with one college or university designated to lead the network. These centers would focus on research, development, and education related to cybersecurity in the agriculture sector, including seed agriculture, horticulture, animal agriculture, and the broader agricultural supply chain.
The centers would be tasked with developing tools and systems to detect and respond to cyber threats, building testbeds, running attack-and-defense exercises, and providing cybersecurity training for agricultural stakeholders. Eligible recipients would be colleges or universities with programs in food and agriculture sciences and cybersecurity that can coordinate with industry, cooperatives, government, and other stakeholders. The bill authorizes $25 million annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to support the program.
If enacted, the bill would amend the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 by adding a new section establishing a federal agriculture cybersecurity grant program. It would create a new USDA-administered framework for funding regional research and training centers, expand the role of land-grant and other eligible universities in agricultural cybersecurity, and potentially strengthen cyber resilience across farming, food production, and supply-chain systems. The bill does not directly regulate private parties, but it could influence industry practices through federally supported research, training, and technology development.
The available context suggests generally positive and forward-looking sentiment, with the bill framed as a proactive response to cybersecurity risks facing agriculture. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided material, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or amendment debate. The bill’s bipartisan sponsorship and focus on research, workforce development, and infrastructure resilience suggest broad policy appeal.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, if the bill advances, could include the size and duration of the authorization, which institutions qualify as eligible entities, how the five regional centers are distributed, and whether the federal government should prioritize this sector-specific cybersecurity initiative over other agricultural or homeland security needs. However, none of these issues are shown to have been disputed in the available record.