For decades, cybersecurity benefited from a constraint that was easy to take for granted: Attackers were limited by human capabilities. Finding vulnerabilities and developing reliable exploits required expertise. Reconnaissance, lateral movement, and adaptation took time and effort.
For decades, cybersecurity benefited from a constraint that was easy to take for granted: Attackers were limited by human capabilities. Finding vulnerabilities and developing reliable exploits required expertise. Reconnaissance, lateral movement, and adaptation took time and effort.
That friction created something valuable for security practitioners: a window in which they could identify and assess risk, prioritize remediation, and respond in order to better secure their environments. Now, that window is getting smaller.
Adversaries are increasingly using AI to accelerate and scale established attack techniques. The CrowdStrike 2026 Global Threat Report found an 89% year-over-year increase in attacks by AI-enabled adversaries and a 42% increase in zero-day vulnerabilities exploited before public disclosure. Frontier AI models capable of complex reasoning, software analysis, and autonomous problem solving are poised to accelerate vulnerability discovery, analyze attack paths, and support exploit development.
To keep pace with AI-accelerated adversaries, businesses must rethink long-standing assumptions about how cybersecurity programs prioritize, manage, and respond to these risks. Below are five rules CIOs should adopt for the frontier AI era.
Security programs have historically focused on scanning more assets to find and address more vulnerabilities. Frontier AI challenges that model because discovery is becoming cheaper and faster. As AI becomes better at analyzing software and finding weaknesses, organizations may face substantially more findings without gaining more people or time to address them.
This puts greater emphasis on prioritization: determining which exposures represent meaningful risk and where limited remediation resources should be directed first.
In context
- Topic: Ciberseguridad — Riesgo, identidad, respuesta a incidentes y cumplimiento.
- Source: CIO
- Published: 08/10/2026
Continue reading at the original source →
Excerpt published automatically by the site radar. The full text belongs to its publisher and is linked above.
Why it matters
Most incidents that end up being expensive did not start with a sophisticated technique. They started with an account that should have been closed when somebody resigned, a server nobody knew was still on, or a broad permission granted to unblock someone that then stayed forever.
I separate technical risk from business risk, because they do not always match. A critical vulnerability in an isolated system matters less than a medium one in the system that issues invoices. Prioritising by severity without looking at where the money is is an expensive way to work hard and protect little.
What usually goes wrong
What I see fail most is the backup. It is configured, it runs every night, nobody checks it. The day you need to restore, it turns out it had been failing silently for four months, or that everything was backed up except exactly what was needed. A backup never restored is an assumption.
What to watch
- Whether third parties or suppliers were in the chain, because the perimeter now includes partners.
- How long it took to detect, usually the most revealing metric in the whole case.
- Whether initial access came from a legitimate account handled badly, which is the most frequent pattern.
How I read this entry
What I would review this very week is access: accounts belonging to people who left, permissions that grew without anyone trimming them, and shared credentials everybody swears do not exist. It is the least glamorous work and the one that cuts off the most attacks.
This entry is an excerpt from the original source, selected by the site radar. The commentary above is the site's own and does not belong to the cited publisher.
Comments
No comments yet. Yours can be the first.
Living through this in your own team?
Open the chat and tell me how you're handling it. I'm interested in comparing notes.
