Critical infrastructure Archives | Page 12 of 173

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!

Australia and Japan expand cooperation on AI, supply chains and resilience

Australia and Japan have issued a joint declaration on economic security cooperation, stating that economic and technological resilience are central to national security and setting out a broad agenda for closer bilateral coordination across supply chains, critical technologies, and Indo-Pacific connectivity.

The declaration states that economic resilience is foundational to both countries’ security and that the framework is intended to strengthen strategic autonomy, indispensability, and regional resilience.

Furthermore, the declaration commits the two governments to closer policy alignment through existing bilateral mechanisms and to consultation on economic security contingencies linked to geopolitical tensions, economic coercion, and major market disruptions.

A major focus is on supply chain security in strategically significant sectors. Australia and Japan reaffirmed their partnership on minerals, energy, food, and industrial goods, while expressing concern over economic coercion, harmful overcapacity, and export restrictions, particularly in critical minerals.

The declaration also highlights cooperation on critical minerals projects, domestic smelting and metals processing, and coordination among government-backed finance institutions to support investment and supply chain resilience.

The text also emphasises critical and emerging technologies. Australia and Japan say they will deepen cooperation on research security and integrity, while promoting trusted collaboration between governments, national laboratories, industry, and academia in areas including AI, data centres, quantum, biotechnology, space, undersea cables, and telecommunications. The declaration also links advanced technologies to defence industry cooperation and supply chain collaboration.

In the Indo-Pacific, the two countries say they will work together to foster a safe, secure, and trustworthy AI and digital ecosystem, including through the Hiroshima AI Process and cooperation on digital infrastructure such as telecommunications, undersea cables, data centres, and all-photonics networks. The declaration also commits them to stronger coordination on secure undersea cables, describing them as vital regional infrastructure.

More broadly, Australia and Japan reaffirm support for a rules-based international economic order centred on the World Trade Organization, while also backing further work through the The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, the Quad, the Asia Zero Emission Community, and other regional initiatives.

The declaration presents economic security cooperation not only as a bilateral priority but as part of a wider effort to strengthen resilience, secure connectivity, and trusted technology governance across the Indo-Pacific.

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

Canada and partners welcome EU as strategic partner in telecom coalition

The Government of Canada and its international partners have announced that the European Union has joined the Global Coalition on Telecommunications as its first strategic partner, reinforcing cooperation on secure, resilient, and trusted next-generation telecom networks.

The coalition, established in 2023, brings together governments, including Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia, to promote secure supply chains, interoperable standards, and telecommunications innovation. More recent expansion has also brought in Finland and Sweden, widening the coalition’s international reach and its work on future telecom technologies, including 6G.

The EU’s inclusion reflects a shared interest in closer policy coordination, technical standards development, and telecom innovation. As a strategic partner, the EU is expected to contribute to discussions, support coalition workstreams, and collaborate on initiatives aligned with the group’s broader objectives. Strategic partnerships are designed to allow flexible cooperation while leaving governance control with the coalition’s core members.

Canadian officials described the step as a significant milestone in efforts to strengthen secure and trusted telecommunications networks through joint policy, research, and innovation. In practical terms, the move points to a broader effort among like-minded partners to shape the future of telecom infrastructure through coordinated international action rather than fragmented national approaches. This final sentence is an inference grounded in the coalition’s stated purpose and the new strategic partner model.

Why does it matter?

The significance of the move lies in the way telecom policy is increasingly being treated as a strategic coordination issue rather than just a domestic infrastructure question. By bringing the EU into the coalition as its first strategic partner, the group is widening its capacity to shape standards, supply chain resilience, and future network technologies across a broader transatlantic and Indo-Pacific policy space. That matters because the contest over telecom systems is no longer only about connectivity, but also about security, industrial policy, and influence over the technologies that will underpin future digital economies.

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

Agentic AI risks outlined in joint cyber agency guidance

Six cybersecurity agencies have jointly published guidance urging organisations to adopt agentic AI services cautiously. The document warns that greater autonomy can increase cyber risk, particularly as agentic AI is introduced into critical infrastructure, defence, and other mission-critical environments.

The authors say organisations should use agentic AI primarily for low-risk and non-sensitive tasks and should not grant it broad or unrestricted access to sensitive data or critical systems. The guidance also recommends incremental deployment rather than large-scale implementation from the outset.

The document was co-authored by agencies from Australia, the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom: the Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and National Security Agency, the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, New Zealand’s National Cyber Security Centre, and the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre.

It defines agentic AI as systems composed of one or more agents that rely on AI models, such as large language models, to interpret context, make decisions, and take actions, often without continuous human intervention. The guidance says these systems often combine an LLM-based agent with tools, external data, memory, and planning functions, which expands both capability and attack surface.

The agencies say agentic AI inherits many of the vulnerabilities already associated with large language models while introducing greater complexity and new systemic risks. The document identifies five broad categories of concern: privilege risks, design and configuration risks, behaviour risks, structural risks, and accountability risks.

It warns that over-privileged agents, insecure third-party tools, goal misalignment, emergent or deceptive behaviour, and opaque decision-making chains can all increase the likelihood and impact of compromise. To reduce those risks, the guidance recommends secure design, strong identity management, defence-in-depth, comprehensive testing, threat modelling, progressive deployment, isolation, continuous monitoring, and strict privilege controls.

The agencies also stress that human approval should remain in place for high-impact actions and that agentic AI security should be treated as part of broader cybersecurity governance rather than as a separate discipline. The document concludes by calling for stronger research, collaboration, and agent-specific evaluations as the technology matures.

Why does it matter?

The guidance matters because it draws a clear line between ordinary AI adoption and agentic systems that can act with far more autonomy inside real operational environments. Once AI tools move from assisting users to making decisions, calling tools, and interacting with sensitive systems, the security challenge shifts from model safety alone to full organisational risk management. That is why the document treats agentic AI not as a niche technical issue, but as a governance and cyber resilience problem that organisations need to control before deploying at scale.

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

Swisscom says AI and geopolitics are reshaping the cyber threat landscape

Swisscom has published its 2026 Cybersecurity Threat Radar, warning that cyber threats have grown more complex over the past year as geopolitical tensions and disruptive technologies put added pressure on digital systems. The report presents AI, supply chain exposure, digital sovereignty, and operational technology security as four strategic risk areas for organisations.

The report highlights state-linked cyber activity, hybrid influence operations such as disinformation, and supply chain attacks as key drivers of the current threat environment. It argues that digital transformation has increased dependence on cloud services, third-party software, AI systems, and networked industrial infrastructure, making organisations more exposed to cascading failures and external dependencies.

On AI, Swisscom describes insecure AI use as a risk multiplier. While AI can improve productivity, the report warns that poor governance, weak visibility into models, and uncontrolled use of AI tools in operational environments can expand attack surfaces, affect data quality, and create new compliance challenges.

Software supply chains are also identified as a persistent vulnerability. Swisscom says a single compromised component or manipulated update process can have far-reaching consequences across interconnected systems, making software integrity, origin verification, and traceability increasingly important as mitigation measures.

The convergence of information technology and operational technology is presented as another growing area of concern. In sectors such as energy, healthcare, manufacturing, and building automation, incidents can have consequences that go well beyond financial loss, affecting critical infrastructure, production, and even human safety.

The report also places greater emphasis on digital sovereignty, arguing that organisations need clearer visibility over where data is processed, which legal regimes apply, and how dependent they are on cloud and technology providers. In that sense, Swisscom frames cybersecurity less as a narrow IT function and more as a strategic governance issue tied to resilience, control, and trust.

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

Ransomware accounts for 90% of cyber losses in manufacturing, claims data shows

Ransomware is responsible for 90% of total cyber-related financial losses in the manufacturing sector, despite accounting for only 12% of claim volume by number, according to an analysis of insurance claims data published by Resilience.

The findings indicate that while ransomware incidents are not the most frequently filed claim type, they produce disproportionately large financial losses when they occur. The manufacturing sector’s low tolerance for operational downtime is identified as a contributing factor to loss severity.

Additional findings from the claims dataset include:

30% of manufacturing claims are linked to phishing and transfer fraud
26% of total losses are associated with multi-factor authentication (MFA) misconfiguration
12% of claims involved wrongful data collection

The report identifies MFA misconfiguration as a notable area of exposure, alongside procedural gaps in financial transfer controls. Recommended mitigation measures include auditing MFA deployment, implementing transfer verification procedures, and investing in ransomware containment capabilities.

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

EU and Republic of Korea launch aviation partnership on technical cooperation and cyber resilience

European and South Korean aviation authorities are conducting a three-week series of technical exchanges in Seoul, covering safety oversight, airspace management, and cybersecurity.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and South Korea’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport are participating under the EU–Republic of Korea Aviation Partnership Project, an EU-funded initiative announced by the European External Action Service (EEAS).

The programme began with a three-day session on the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP), which assesses national aviation safety oversight systems. EASA presented findings from its most recent ICAO audit, with discussions covering oversight frameworks, organisational structures, and lessons identified.

A workshop on performance-based navigation and airspace management followed, addressing procedures to improve the predictability and efficiency of aircraft arrivals, including at airports with parallel runways.

A third workshop on aviation cybersecurity is scheduled for the coming week. It will cover security considerations across aviation systems, including aircraft certification processes and air traffic management infrastructure.

The activities are designed to facilitate technical exchange between Korean and European stakeholders across the aviation sector, according to EASA.

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