Critical infrastructure

Council of the EU extends cyber sanctions framework until 2027

The Council of the European Union has extended restrictive measures against individuals and entities involved in cyber-attacks threatening the EU and its member states until 18 May 2027. The legal framework behind the sanctions regime had already been extended until 18 May 2028.

The framework allows the EU to impose targeted sanctions on persons or entities involved in significant cyber-attacks that constitute an external threat to the Union or its member states. Measures can also be imposed in response to cyber-attacks against third countries or international organisations, where they support Common Foreign and Security Policy objectives.

Current listings under the regime apply to 19 individuals and seven entities. Sanctioned actors face asset freezes, while the EU citizens and companies are prohibited from making funds or economic resources available to them. Listed individuals are also subject to travel bans preventing them from entering or transiting through the EU territory.

The Council said the individual listings will continue to be reviewed every 12 months. It also said the measures are intended to deter malicious cyber activity and uphold the international rules-based order by ensuring accountability for those responsible.

The sanctions mechanism forms part of the EU’s broader cyber diplomacy toolbox, established in 2017 to strengthen coordinated diplomatic responses to malicious cyber activity. The Council said the EU and its member states would continue working with international partners to promote an open, free, stable and secure cyberspace.

Why does it matter?

The decision shows how cybersecurity has become part of the EU’s foreign policy and sanctions toolkit, not only a matter of technical defence. By extending cyber sanctions listings, the EU is reinforcing its use of diplomatic and economic measures to deter malicious cyber activity, attribute responsibility and signal that significant cyber-attacks can carry geopolitical consequences.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!  

Cybercrime Atlas launches open-source map of criminal networks

Cybercrime Atlas has launched Cosmos, an open-source platform designed to map global cybercrime networks and strengthen cooperation among defenders, investigators, prosecutors and policymakers.

Hosted by the World Economic Forum’s Centre for Cybersecurity, Cybercrime Atlas aims to build a shared understanding of cybercriminal ecosystems at a time when ransomware, fraud and illicit digital services are becoming increasingly organised and industrialised.

The initiative responds to a long-standing problem in cybercrime disruption: fragmented terminology, isolated investigations and inconsistent reporting structures. Cosmos aims to standardise definitions, organise threat intelligence into a shared structure and help different actors coordinate more effectively across borders.

The first version of the platform contains nine core categories, 229 identified cybercrime-related elements and 849 mapped connections showing how criminal networks, tools and services interact. The dataset is designed to expand as the wider community contributes new intelligence.

Why does it matter?

Cybercrime increasingly functions as an interconnected ecosystem, with specialised groups, tools, infrastructure providers and illicit services supporting one another across borders. A shared map of those relationships could help shift cyber defence from isolated incident response towards more coordinated disruption of criminal networks, while giving investigators and policymakers a clearer view of how digital crime is organised.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

Canada advances sovereign AI data centre strategy with TELUS

The Canadian government and TELUS are advancing plans to develop large-scale sovereign AI infrastructure as part of Ottawa’s broader strategy to strengthen domestic compute capacity and support the country’s AI ecosystem.

The initiative was announced by Evan Solomon (Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario) and focuses on a proposed AI data centre project in British Columbia designed to support researchers, businesses, and academic institutions.

A project that forms part of Canada’s ‘Enabling large-scale sovereign AI data centres’ initiative, which was introduced under Budget 2025. Ottawa stated that sovereign compute infrastructure is increasingly important for maintaining national competitiveness in AI while ensuring Canadian data, intellectual property, and economic value remain within the country.

The government also confirmed that no formal funding commitments have yet been distributed, with discussions currently progressing through non-binding memoranda of understanding with selected industry participants.

Local officials argued that large-scale compute infrastructure has become a strategic economic requirement as governments worldwide race to expand AI processing capabilities. Canada believes it holds competitive advantages due to its colder climate, sustainable energy resources, and network infrastructure, all of which could help attract future AI investment and hyperscale data centre development.

Why does it matter?

The race for sovereign AI infrastructure is rapidly becoming one of the most important geopolitical and economic competitions of the digital era. The Canada-TELUS partnership illustrates how countries are moving beyond AI model development alone and shifting focus towards the physical infrastructure required to sustain future AI ecosystems, including data centres, energy capacity, semiconductors, and domestic compute networks.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!  

Joint cybersecurity agencies publish guidance on secure adoption of agentic AI

Cybersecurity agencies from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States have published joint guidance on the careful adoption of agentic AI services in organisational IT environments.

The guidance is intended to help organisations design, develop, deploy and operate agentic AI systems, and to make informed risk assessments and mitigations. It primarily focuses on large-language-model-based agentic AI systems.

The publication examines threats to and vulnerabilities within agentic AI systems, including risks introduced through system components, integrations and downstream use. It also considers broader risks arising from agentic AI behaviour in IT environments.

The guidance covers wider agentic AI security considerations, specific security risks, best practices for securing agentic AI systems and steps organisations can take to prepare for emerging and future threats.

It was co-authored by the Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the US National Security Agency, the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, the New Zealand National Cyber Security Centre and the UK National Cyber Security Centre.

Why does it matter?

Agentic AI systems can act with greater autonomy than conventional software tools, including by interacting with other systems, using integrations and taking steps towards defined goals. That creates new cybersecurity risks when such tools are embedded in organisational IT environments. The joint guidance shows that major cyber agencies are treating agentic AI as an emerging operational security issue, not only as a question of AI policy or experimentation.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot! 

AI cyber capabilities raise risk of correlated financial system failures, IMF warns

AI is rapidly reshaping the global financial system’s cyber risk landscape, according to analysis associated with the International Monetary Fund. While AI improves defence, it also helps attackers find and exploit vulnerabilities more quickly, increasing the risk of systemic disruption.

Financial infrastructure is highly interconnected, relying on shared software, cloud services, and payment networks. IMF analysis suggests that AI-enabled cyberattacks could trigger correlated institutional failures, leading to funding stress, solvency risks, and disruptions to payments and market operations.

Recent developments in advanced AI models demonstrate how quickly offensive capabilities are evolving, with systems now able to identify weaknesses across widely used platforms.

At the same time, defensive AI tools are being deployed to detect threats and strengthen resilience, but their effectiveness depends on governance, oversight, and integration within financial institutions.

Authorities are now being urged to treat cyber risk as a core financial stability issue rather than a purely technical challenge. Stronger supervision, resilience standards, and international coordination are viewed as essential, particularly as cyber threats increasingly cross borders and exploit shared global infrastructure.

Why does it matter? 

Cyber risks related to AI are a macroeconomic threat that can affect liquidity, confidence, and core financial intermediation. At the same time, the same technology is essential for defence, meaning resilience now depends on how quickly supervision, governance, and international coordination can keep pace with rapidly scaling offensive capabilities.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our  chatbot!  

Australia’s ASIC urges cyber resilience as frontier AI raises risk

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has urged regulated entities to strengthen cyber resilience, warning that frontier AI could intensify cyber risks by exposing vulnerabilities at greater speed, scale and sophistication.

In an open letter to industry, ASIC said licensees and market participants should act now to improve their cybersecurity fundamentals rather than wait as advanced AI tools reshape the threat environment. The regulator said cyber resilience should be treated as a core licensing obligation, not solely as an IT issue.

ASIC Commissioner Simone Constant said frontier AI creates opportunities but also materially increases cyber risk, including by exposing weaknesses faster than many organisations realise. She warned that vulnerabilities once seen as isolated could have system-wide effects and enable previously out-of-reach forms of exploitation for many malicious actors.

The letter follows ASIC’s recent court outcome against FIIG Securities Limited, which the regulator said reinforced the need for cyber risk management controls to be demonstrably effective and proportionate to a business’s size, nature and complexity.

ASIC is urging entities to reassess cyber plans, identify and protect critical systems, reduce exposure to untrusted networks, review user access, patch systems promptly, strengthen incident response planning and manage third-party risks. It also says organisations should use AI defensively where appropriate, including to identify vulnerabilities and secure software before release.

Constant said entities need robust incident response plans and that the underlying principles of cyber risk management remain the same: govern, protect, detect and respond. She also said boards and executives must ensure systems are tested, weaknesses are addressed early, and action is taken before threats can be exploited.

ASIC says entities must table the letter at their ultimate board and risk governance committees. It also encourages regulated entities to use guidance from trusted sources, including the Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Government’s Cyber Health Check.

Why does it matter?

ASIC’s warning shows that financial regulators are beginning to treat frontier AI as a force multiplier of cyber risk, not just a technology issue. By framing cyber resilience as a licensing and board-level governance obligation, the regulator is signalling that firms may be judged not only on whether they suffer cyber incidents, but on whether their controls, escalation processes and resilience planning are proportionate to an AI-accelerated threat environment.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

WEF report says AI is reshaping cybersecurity defence

Advanced AI models are reshaping cybersecurity by accelerating both offensive and defensive capabilities, forcing organisations to rethink how they detect, assess and respond to cyber threats.

A new World Economic Forum report argues that AI is becoming a defining force in cybersecurity, with organisations increasingly moving from pilot projects to operational deployment. According to the WEF, AI is already being used to improve vulnerability identification, threat detection, response speed and resilience.

The report highlights how AI can help security teams process large volumes of data, detect threats faster and support more efficient responses. At the same time, it warns that threat actors are also using AI to automate deception, generate malware and scale attacks at machine speed.

WEF’s analysis says the growing speed and scale of AI-enabled cyber operations are putting pressure on traditional cybersecurity models. Instead of relying mainly on prevention and scheduled patching cycles, organisations are being pushed towards continuous detection, automated response, stronger access controls and more resilient infrastructure.

The report also stresses that AI’s value in cybersecurity depends on strategy, governance and human oversight. Rather than treating AI as a standalone tool, organisations are encouraged to test use cases carefully, build appropriate safeguards and invest in the skills and processes needed to defend at machine speed.

Why does it matter?

AI is changing cybersecurity on both sides of the equation. It can lower the barriers for faster and more scalable attacks, but it can also help defenders improve detection, response and resilience. The wider significance is that cybersecurity strategies built around periodic assessment and manual response may become less effective as AI-driven threats and defences operate at greater speed and scale.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EESC backs revised Cybersecurity Act with warnings on ENISA and supply chains

The European Economic and Social Committee has backed the EU’s proposed revision of the Cybersecurity Act, supporting reforms to ENISA, the cybersecurity certification framework and ICT supply-chain security, while warning that the next phase of the EU cyber policy must remain workable in practice.

In its opinion, the committee argues that cybersecurity and ICT supply-chain security should not be treated as narrow technical questions. Instead, it presents them as matters of economic security and geopolitical resilience, closely linked to the EU’s competitiveness, legal certainty and broader resilience.

The opinion welcomes the European Commission’s attempt to update the Cybersecurity Act and align related rules under NIS 2, particularly where the package aims to simplify compliance and reduce overlapping obligations. At the same time, the committee says that a stronger ENISA will require stronger backing. If the agency is expected to take on more responsibilities, those tasks should come with adequate resources, specialist staff and a mandatory workforce plan.

The committee also supports a single-entry point for incident reporting. It says parallel reporting requirements under NIS 2, DORA and sector-specific rules should be streamlined so that one comprehensive report can serve all relevant regulatory regimes.

On ICT supply-chain security, the opinion supports a structured EU framework for identifying key assets and addressing high-risk suppliers. However, it warns that restrictions and phase-outs should be transparent, proportionate and supported by realistic transition plans that account for replacement timelines, service continuity, costs, labour-market effects and the risk of shifting compliance burdens onto smaller firms outside the regulation’s scope.

The committee also calls for the cyber debate to address democratic resilience. A proposed amendment would give ENISA a clearer role in supporting election security, democratic resilience and public awareness of cyber threats, disinformation and safe digital behaviour.

Why does it matter?

The opinion supports a more centralised and strategic EU cybersecurity framework, but also highlights the practical risks of expanding cyber regulation faster than institutions and companies can implement it. The debate around ENISA’s mandate, incident reporting and ICT supply-chain restrictions will shape how far the EU can strengthen cyber resilience without creating fragmented obligations or disproportionate burdens for smaller firms.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Rising data centre demand increases energy and cyber risks

Data centres are increasingly central to digital economies, but their rapid expansion is reshaping both electricity demand and cybersecurity risks. According to the International Energy Agency, data centres used about 1.5% of global electricity in 2024, with demand rising as AI and cloud services expand.

These facilities operate as both energy consumers and producers, relying on grid power while also maintaining on-site generation and battery systems. Their ability to switch power sources instantly supports service continuity but can also cause sudden load shifts that challenge grid stability during outages or cyber incidents.

Cybersecurity is now closely tied to energy resilience. Data centres depend on interconnected systems such as backup power, cooling, and digital control networks, all of which require continuous monitoring and protection.

Weaknesses in any part of this ‘system of systems’ can affect both service availability and wider electricity infrastructure.

Why does it matter? 

Data centres are becoming a critical infrastructure that directly affects both digital services and electricity systems. Shared planning for power disruptions, cyber events, and load management is increasingly seen as necessary to ensure stability across both digital services and national energy systems.

Their rising energy demand and reliance on complex on-site and grid power arrangements mean disruptions or cyber incidents can have wider knock-on effects, making resilience and cross-sector coordination essential for overall system stability.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

ENISA to host 2026 telecom and digital infrastructure security forum

The European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) has announced its Telecom and Digital Infrastructure Security Forum 2026, bringing together telecom experts, policymakers and national authorities to address emerging cybersecurity risks.

The forum will focus on challenges, including cyberattacks on telecom networks, resilience issues such as power dependencies, and the security implications of new technologies. It aims to support strategic and technical dialogue across the sector.

Organised with the Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the EU, the event provides a private setting for collaboration among industry specialists, regulators and the wider cybersecurity community, without public broadcasting.

Discussions will contribute to ongoing efforts to strengthen coordinated telecom security measures and policy development across the EU, with the event taking place in Nicosia, Cyprus.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot! 

Diplo chatbot can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.