Critiquing the "AI favors offense" thesis in cybersecurity
soumitrashukla9 · x · 2026-08-18
Responding to an essay by Irregular Expressions, Ziv Ravid critiques the prevailing narrative that "AI favors offense" in cybersecurity. He argues that this thesis relies too heavily on capability data (benchmarks, inference costs) and ignores behavioral data regarding how real intrusions happen (e.g., phishing, credentials). Ravid also notes that Irregular experienced their own containment failure during evaluations, suggesting that the industry is not ready to decide which capabilities are safe to accelerate.
More from Safety
- Models can detect deception and figure out who to ignore — logangraham · 2026-08-19
- OpenAI Frontier Red Team Probes Socioeconomic Risks of Trillions of Agents — logangraham · 2026-08-19
- Miles Brundage: AI Safety Auditing Must Examine Company-Wide Processes — Miles_Brundage · 2026-08-18
- Anthropic's Text Watermarking Proves AI Companies Do Not Care About Writing — 404 Media · 2026-08-18
- Microsoft's Vulnerability Research Founder Advises on US Govt's AI 'Gold Eagle' Initiative — WeldPond · 2026-08-18
- Building Zero-Trust AI Agents: Google ADK Guide to Prevent Prompt Injection — rseroter · 2026-08-18