Cloud and identity
Account permissions, privileged roles and cloud configuration. Examine which identities can reach sensitive assets.
AI-enabled attacks · Conventional infrastructure
You don’t need AI
to be targeted by it.
Your cloud accounts, remote access, websites and APIs are still the target. AI can help attackers work through familiar weaknesses faster. Test the systems your business already depends on—not only the AI you deploy.
BW / ILLUSTRATIVE SCOPE
01EXPOSED SERVICES
02IDENTITY / ACCESS
03BUSINESS-CRITICAL SYSTEMS
AUTHORIZE / TEST / VERIFY
AI-assisted. Human-validated.Authorized scope. Actionable evidence.
Two different security questions.
Protecting your business from AI-enabled attackers is broader than securing an AI product. Choose the assessment that matches your exposure.
Defend against AI-enabled attacks
Review conventional infrastructure, access controls and attack paths. Your organization does not need an AI product for this work to be relevant.
Secure the AI you deploy
Assess prompt injection, retrieval boundaries and tool permissions in AI applications and connected agents.
Familiar systems. More ways to test them.
Remote access
VPNs, remote administration and access policies. Review exposed entry points, authentication and supported configurations.
Web applications and APIs
Authentication, authorization and business workflows. Validate application weaknesses rather than treating scanner alerts as proof.
Internet-facing services
Map the agreed external attack surface and assess relevant exposure. Distinguish reachable services from validated security findings.
Connected attack paths
Explore how an agreed weakness could connect to another boundary. Any movement between systems stays explicitly in scope.
Detection and response
For a separately scoped exercise, observe whether relevant activity is detected and escalated. Agree contacts and stop conditions first.
What about AI agent “swarms”?
Coordinated AI agents can divide work across an attack campaign. Threat researchers have reported multi-agent operations against conventional systems. That does not mean every business is facing a fully autonomous swarm—but it makes testing identity, access controls and exposed services increasingly relevant.
A useful assessment scenario is parallelized discovery and testing across an agreed set of assets, followed by human validation. “Swarm” describes coordination here; it is not a claim that attacks are inevitable, autonomous end to end, or equally common in every sector.
Evidence, with context
Observed cases: Anthropic’s September 2026 report describes selected multi-agent threat operations, including human involvement. These vendor-observed cases do not establish how typical such operations are across all businesses. Anthropic · 09/2026 ↗
Forecast: the UK NCSC’s May 2025 assessment projects AI-driven improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of existing attack methods through 2027. A forecast is not a measured attack rate for your organization. NCSC · 05/2025 ↗
A clear scope. Useful evidence.
- An agreed asset inventory, objectives, test accounts and rules of engagement
- Human-validated findings, observed impact and reproducible evidence
- Prioritized improvements to access, exposure and defensive controls
- Coverage limitations, residual risks and a defined remediation-verification plan
Controlled testing. Accountable people.
Written authorization comes first. Agree permitted systems, methods, test windows, data handling, rate limits, escalation contacts and stop conditions. No unrestricted autonomous testing. Disruption, social engineering and third-party assets are excluded unless separately authorized.
Assessment depth, delivery capability and commercial terms are confirmed before engagement. Results are point-in-time and scope-limited; no assessment guarantees protection.
Before we begin.
We do not use AI. Is this still relevant?
Yes. This assessment concerns how an attacker may use AI against your existing systems. It is separate from reviewing the security of AI features you build or buy.
Does this mean we are under attack by autonomous swarms?
No. We do not infer an active attack from your technology stack. Coordinated-agent scenarios are used to frame relevant defensive questions, not to diagnose a breach or predict inevitable compromise.
Is this a penetration test or a red-team exercise?
The scope determines the work. A penetration test examines agreed assets and weaknesses. A broader adversary simulation can evaluate detection and response, but needs separate objectives, authorization and operational readiness.
Will you run a large AI cluster against our production systems?
The testing approach, tools, concurrency and safety limits must be agreed first. This page does not promise a particular compute infrastructure or authorize testing. Human reviewers remain responsible for validating findings.
Find the paths that matter.
Tell us which cloud environments, applications, identities or remote-access systems you want assessed, and what business outcome you need. Keep the initial enquiry high-level; do not include credentials or confidential system details.
Plan an infrastructure assessmentOpens your email app. Nothing is sent automatically.