Hundred firms urge stronger cyber defences against AI attacks
One hundred firms, including Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI, have urged governments and organisations to strengthen cyber defences before increasingly capable AI systems can overwhelm existing safeguards. The letter argues that AI-assisted attacks could become more frequent and sophisticated within months, making protection of critical infrastructure such as hospitals and water utilities more urgent.
Signatories include banks, payment firms and major technology companies, while calling for defensive AI tools and stronger testing. The warning comes as some signatories develop powerful cyber-capable systems: Anthropic says its Mythos tool found a 27-year-old vulnerability, while OpenAI agents reportedly collaborated in a successful test attack on Hugging Face; US senators have also proposed a “Kill Switch Act” for rogue AI models.
- Tech firms warn AI could rapidly intensify cyber-attacks.
- They want stronger defences for critical infrastructure.
- Powerful AI tools are already demonstrating cyber capabilities.
New here? Start with this
Cyber security means protecting computer systems, networks and data from attacks. These systems support essential services such as hospitals, water supplies, banking and online platforms, so weaknesses can affect organisations and the people who rely on them.
Artificial intelligence can help defenders find software flaws and respond to threats, but it can also help attackers work faster or make attacks more sophisticated. Technology companies, banks and payment firms are among the organisations developing or using these tools, while governments set rules and oversee protection of public services.
The debate centres on how to prepare for more capable AI without disrupting useful technology. Measures under discussion include testing systems, using AI for defence and strengthening safeguards around services that are critical to daily life.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that governments and operators of essential services should act now because AI can lower the cost and skill barrier for cyberattacks, allowing criminals or hostile states to probe systems at much greater speed and scale. They contend that stronger testing, secure-by-design standards and carefully deployed defensive AI are prudent safeguards for hospitals, water systems and financial networks, particularly when firms are already demonstrating growing cyber capabilities. The underlying value is prevention: waiting for a major AI-enabled attack could leave the public exposed to harms that are difficult to reverse.
The case against
Sceptics argue that alarming predictions from companies building advanced AI should be treated cautiously, since such warnings may also support regulation that favours large incumbent firms able to absorb compliance costs. They may favour targeted, evidence-led improvements to ordinary cyber hygiene and critical-infrastructure resilience rather than emergency measures or broad powers over AI models, which could hamper beneficial research, competition and open security work. The underlying value is proportionality: policy should address real risks without granting industry or government excessive control on the basis of uncertain forecasts.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by BBC Technology as “Google, Microsoft and OpenAI among 100 firms calling for better cyber defences”.