Cybersecurity | Breaking Cybersecurity News | The Hacker News

The proliferation of AI agents in the enterprise has moved from theoretical to practical at a remarkable pace. These agents, whether developed internally or licensed, are increasingly integrated into core business workflows. While they promise substantial gains in automation and productivity, they also introduce a new and complex class of security risks that demand immediate attention.  The core challenge is not whether to adopt AI agents, but how to govern them effectively. A disciplined approach to balancing innovation with security is essential for any organization looking to leverage AI without exposing itself to unacceptable risk.  Recent research highlights the urgency of this issue. A comprehensive study found that 82% of companies are already using AI agents, with 53% acknowledging they access sensitive information daily . This rapid adoption, often occurring without adequate oversight, creates significant vulnerabilities. The imperative is clear: organizations must...

AI SOC Agents are going through a hype cycle. If we're going by Gartner's Hype Cycle for Security Operations, 2025 , this technology is still an "Innovation Trigger", but it's at the cusp of "Peak of Inflated Expectations". Every vendor claims their solution will revolutionize security operations. Every conference features another keynote promising autonomous defense. And every CISO is being asked whether AI will replace their security team. At Redis, implementing AI in the SOC has been more of a measured journey. The model is more of a hybrid SOC, so there's a combination of external service providers as well as internal resources. In this case, Prophet Security is currently proving themselves alongside a more traditional MDR provider.  But let's take a step back.  The Tipping Point for AI Adoption within the SOC Considering an AI solution for Redis' SOC came down to the confluence of three drivers.  On an individual level, there was more value from AI tools an...

The browser has quietly become the most critical application in the enterprise — and the most targeted. With SaaS, cloud, and hybrid work redefining IT boundaries, browsers now handle proprietary data, credentials, and business workflows. Yet legacy security tools like firewalls, antivirus, and EDR were never designed to defend this new digital front line. The shift from being an ancillary tool to becoming the main location of work means legacy security solutions, such as firewalls, antivirus, VDI, etc., are not equipped to provide the necessary level of protection needed to secure today's organizations. The browser, once an afterthought, is now the weak link that legacy defenses simply can't secure.  This article examines the modern browser exploitation playbook and details why legacy tools alone are no match for today's cybercriminals. By adopting a Secure Enterprise Browser (SEB), enterprises can complement their existing security tools, shore up their weak link, and future-p...

For nearly two decades, managed-security models have defined how most organizations handle detection and response. Faced with alert overload, chronic staffing shortages, and the high cost of 24/7 coverage, many teams turned to Managed Security Service Providers (MSSPs) and later to Managed Detection and Response (MDR) vendors to fill the gap. Beyond staffing and capacity, many also lacked in-house expertise in building detection systems. It was a rational choice. MSSPs and MDRs provided 24/7 monitoring, experienced analysts, and predictable coverage. They gave companies without an in-house SOC a viable way to maintain security coverage in an increasingly complex threat landscape. But the ground has shifted. AI-driven SOC platforms are now automating large parts of what human analysts once did: triaging alerts, correlating signals, enriching incidents, and recommending or even executing responses. That raises a simple but profound question: what happens to the managed-security m...

Introduction What keeps CISOs and security leaders up at night these days? No, it's not the zero-day exploits or the nation-state actors; it's the 3 AM phone call when something goes terribly wrong, and suddenly your entire response depends on how well your people perform under pressure. Not your tools. Your people! Cybersecurity today demands being more proactive, and we are getting better at testing our existing security tools. Adversarial Exposure Validation (AEV) platforms are significantly improving how we validate whether our firewalls, EDRs, SIEMs, and SOARs actually work as advertised. But here's the uncomfortable truth: when a crisis hits, perfect tools in the hands of an unprepared team are about as useful as a Formula 1 race car with a driver who's never left the parking lot. The Exercise Paradox Traditional tabletop or crisis management exercises are run like fire drills - necessary, but hardly sufficient. The challenge has always been scale. Conductin...

In a matter of months, AI became a tool relied on for daily critical tasks. Now, we are seeing it used just as easily to attack systems, deceive users, or even manipulate data. While full capabilities are still being explored, the most significant threats posed by AI are yet unknown. Even without knowing exactly what's coming, organizations can take meaningful steps now and develop identity security strategies to defend against AI-driven threats to avoid being an easy target. Suggestion 1: Start with the basics In the face of unknown AI-driven threats, one of the best places to start is with an identity security strategy that addresses the fundamentals.  When it comes to identity and access management, solutions that offer 'Preemptive Defense' (a term coined by Gartner) allow detection and protection before a user even authenticates to your systems. Think IP reputation checks, web application firewalls, machine learning-based risk scoring, user policies and app policies. Risky...

CISOs know their field. They understand the threat landscape. They understand how to build a strong and cost-effective security stack. They understand how to staff out their organization. They understand the intricacies of compliance. They understand what it takes to reduce risk. Yet one question comes up again and again in our conversations with these security leaders: how do I make the impact of risk clear to business decision-makers? Boards want to hear how risk affects revenue, governance, and growth. They have a limited attention span for lists of vulnerabilities or technical details. When the story gets too technical, even urgent initiatives lose traction and fail to get funded. CISOs need to translate technical issues into terms the board understands. Doing so builds trust, garners support and shows how security decisions connect directly to long-term growth. It was the urgent need to bridge the CISO-Board communication gap that led us to create a new paradigm in CISO continu...

For decades, organizations operated under the assumption that vulnerability management could be slotted into predictable maintenance windows. Monthly patch cycles, quarterly review periods, and planned outages became the standard rhythm of IT operations. Yet, in today's environment, where exploit code emerges within hours of a disclosure and attackers weaponize vulnerabilities on an industrial scale, those rhythms are dangerously outdated. The modern reality is that continuous patch management and end-to-end vulnerability lifecycle governance are no longer aspirational, they are the bare minimum. Security must be measured not by the comfort of predictability, but by the ability to remediate as close to real time as possible. The Problem with Periodic Maintenance Windows Exploitation Outpaces Response: exploits are increasingly released at or before vendor patch availability. A monthly or even bi-weekly patch cadence leaves systems exposed during the critical first days when atta...