Tag: Money

Between May 6 and 7, four security research teams published findings about Anthropic’s Claude that most outlets covered as three separate stories. One involved a water utility in Mexico, another targeted a Chrome extension, and a third hijacked OAuth tokens through Claude Code. In one case, Claude identified a water utility’s SCADA gateway without being told to look for one.These are not three bugs. They are one architectural question playing out on three surfaces. No single patch released so far addresses all of them.The common thread is the confused deputy, a trust-boundary failure where a program with legitimate authority executes actions on behalf of the wrong principal. In each case, Claude held real capabilities on every surface and handed them to whoever showed up. An attacker probing a water utility's network. A Chrome extension with zero permissions. A malicious npm pa

Presented by Apptio, an IBM companyAI spending is surging, but the full impact often remains an open question. Closing the gap requires clear answers to how AI is governed, measured, and tied to business outcomes.ROI uncertainty isn’t unique to AI: In the Apptio 2026 Technology Investment Management Report, 90% of technology leaders surveyed said that ROI uncertainty has a moderate or major impact on overall tech investment decisions, a 5-percentage point year-over-year increase. In other words, tech leaders are increasing their reliance on ROI – even if they don’t fully know how to measure it. And AI economics involves new and unpredictable costs, further complicating ROI calculations. Faced with increasing uncertainty and increasing budgets, technology leaders need a clear, reliable framework for evaluating AI ROI. Organizations incr

Presented by EdgeVerveFor most enterprises, AI adoption began with a straightforward ambition: automate work faster, cheaper, and at scale. Chatbots replaced basic service requests, machine‑learning models optimized forecasts, and analytics dashboards promised sharper insights. Yet many organizations are now discovering that deploying individual AI solutions does not automatically translate into enterprise‑level impact. Pilots proliferate, but value plateaus.The next phase of AI maturity is no longer about deploying more models. It is about adapting AI continuously to changing business objectives, regulatory expectations, operating conditions, and customer contexts. This shift is particularly critical for complex, globally distributed organizations such as Global Business Services (GBS), where outcomes depend on orchestrating work across functions, regions, systems, and stakeholders.From automation to adaptationAI can no longer be treat

Is AI leaving the era of "turn-based" chat?Right now, all of us who use AI models regularly for work or in our personal lives know that the basic interaction mode across text, imagery, audio, and video remains the same: the human user provides an input, waits anywhere between milliseconds to minutes (or in some cases, for particularly tough queries, hours and days), and the AI model provides an output.But if AI is to really take on the load of jobs requiring natural interaction, it will need to do more than provide this kind of "turn-based" interactivity — it will ultimately need to respond more fluidly and naturally to human inputs, even responding while also processing the next human input, be it text or another format. That at least seems to be the contention of

A doctor in a hospital exam room watches as a medical transcription agent updates electronic health records, prompts prescription options, and surfaces patient history in real time. A computer vision agent on a manufacturing line is running quality control at speeds no human inspector can match. Both generate non-human identities that most enterprises cannot inventory, scope, or revoke at machine speed.That is the structural problem keeping agentic AI stuck in pilots. Not model capability. Not compute. Identity governance.Cisco President Jeetu Patel told VentureBeat at RSAC 2026 that 85% of enterprises are running agent pilots while only 5% have reached production. That 80-point gap is a trust problem. The first questions any CISO will ask: which agents have production access to sensitive systems, and who is accountable when one acts outside its scope?

AI agents choose tools from shared registries by matching natural-language descriptions. But no human is verifying whether those descriptions are true. I discovered this gap when I filed Issue #141 in the CoSAI secure-ai-tooling repository. I assumed it would be treated as a single risk entry. The repository maintainer saw it differently and split my submission into two separate issues: One covering selection-time threats (tool impersonation, metadata manipulation); the other covering execution-time threats (behavioral drift, runtime contract violation). That confirmed tool registry poisoning is not one vulnerability. It represents multiple vulnerabilities at every stage of the tool’s life cycle.There’s an immediate tendency to apply the defenses we already have. Over the past 10 years, we’ve built software supply chain controls, including code signing, software bill of materi

Here is a scenario that should concern every enterprise architect shipping autonomous AI systems right now: An observability agent is running in production. Its job is to detect infrastructure anomalies and trigger the appropriate response. Late one night, it flags an elevated anomaly score across a production cluster, 0.87, above its defined threshold of 0.75. The agent is within its permission boundaries. It has access to the rollback service. So it uses it.The rollback causes a four-hour outage. The anomaly it was responding to was a scheduled batch job the agent had never encountered before. There was no actual fault. The agent did not escalate. It did not ask. It acted,  confidently, autonomously, and catastrophically.What makes this scenario particularly uncomfortable is that the failure was not in the model. The model behaved exactly as trained. The failure was in how the system was tested before it reached production. The engineers had validated happy-path be