Daily Tech Digest - January 02, 2026


Quote for the day:

“If your ship doesn’t come in, swim out to meet it!” -- Jonathan Winters



Delivering resilience and continuity for AI

Think of it as technical debt, suggests IDC group VP Daniel Saroff as most enterprises underestimate the strain AI puts on connectivity and compute. Siloed infrastructure won’t deliver what AI needs and CIOs need to think about these and other things in a more integrated way to make AI successful. “You have to look at your GPU infrastructure, bandwidth, network availability, and connectivity between respective applications,” he says. “If you have environments not set up for highly transactional, GPU-intensive environments, you’re going to have a problem,” Saroff warns. “And having very fragmented infrastructure means you need to pull data and integrate multiple different systems, especially when you start to look at agentic AI.” ... Making AI scale will almost certainly mean taking a hard look at your data architecture. Every database adds features for AI. And lakehouses promise you can bring operational data and analytics together without affecting the SLAs of production workloads. Or you can go further with data platforms like Azure Fabric that bring in streaming and time series data to use for AI applications. If you’ve already tried different approaches, you likely need to rearchitect your data layer to get away from the operational sprawl of fragmented microservices, where every data hand-off between separate vector stores, graph databases, and document silos introduces latency and governance gaps. Too many points of failure make it hard to deliver high availability guarantees.


Technological Disruption: Strategic Inflection Points From 2026 - 2036

From a defensive standpoint, AI-driven security solutions will provide continuous surveillance, automated remediation, and predictive threat modeling at a scale unattainable by human analysts. Simultaneously, attackers will utilize AI to create polymorphic malware, execute influence operations, and exploit holes at machine speed. The outcome will be an environment where cyber war progresses more rapidly than conventional command-and-control systems can regulate. As we approach 2036, the primary concern will be AI governance rather than AI capacity. ... From 2026 to 2030, enterprises will increasingly recognize that cryptographic agility is vital. The move to post-quantum cryptography standards means that old systems, especially those in critical infrastructure, financial services, and government networks, need to be fully inventoried, evaluated, and upgraded. By the early 2030s, quantum innovation will transcend cryptography, impacting optimization, materials science, logistics, and national security applications. ... In the forthcoming decade, supply chain security will transition from compliance-based evaluations to ongoing risk intelligence. Transparency methods, including software bills of materials, hardware traceability, and real-time vendor risk assessment, will evolve into standard expectations rather than just best practices. Supply chain resilience will strategically impact national competitiveness.


True agentic AI is years away - here's why and how we get there

We're not there yet. We're not even close. Today's bots are limited to chat interactions and often fail outside that narrow operating context. For example, what Microsoft calls an "agent" in the Microsoft 365 productivity suite, probably the best-known instance of an agent, is simply a way to automatically generate a Word document. Market data shows that agents haven't taken off. ... Simple automations can certainly bring about benefits, such as assisting a call center operator or rapidly handling numerous invoices. However, a growing body of scholarly and technical reports has highlighted the limitations of today's agents, which have failed to advance beyond these basic automations. ... Before agents can live up to the "fully autonomous code" hype of Microsoft and others, they must overcome two primary technological shortcomings. Ongoing research across the industry is focused on these two challenges: Developing a reinforcement learning approach to designing agents; and Re-engineering AI's use of memory -- not just memory chips such as DRAM, but the whole phenomenon of storing and retrieving information. Reinforcement learning, which has been around for decades, has demonstrated striking results in enabling AI to carry out tasks over a very long time horizon. ... On the horizon looms a significant shift in reinforcement learning itself, which could be a boon or further complicate matters. Can AI do a better job of designing reinforcement learning than humans?


Why Developer Experience Matters More Than Ever in Banking

Effective AI assistance, in fact, meets developers where they are—or where they work. Some prefer a command-line interface, others live inside an IDE, and still others rely heavily on sample code and language-specific SDKs. A strong DX strategy supports all of these modes, using AI to surface accurate, context-aware guidance without forcing developers into a single workflow. When AI reinforces clarity, it becomes a force multiplier. ... As AI-assisted development becomes more common, the quality of documentation takes on new importance. Because it is no longer read only by humans, documentation increasingly serves as the knowledge base that enables AI agents that help developers search, generate, and validate code. When documentation is vague or poorly structured, it introduces confusion, often in ways that actively undermine developer confidence. ... In highly regulated environments, developers want, and expect, guardrails—but not at the expense of speed and consistency. One of the most effective ways to balance those demands is by codifying business rules and compliance requirements directly into the platform, rather than relying on manual, human-driven review at key milestones. Talluri describes this approach as “policy as code”: embedding rules, validations, and regional requirements into the system so developers receive immediate, actionable prompts and feedback as they work. ... The business case for exceptional developer experience rests on a simple truth: trust drives productivity.


AI-powered testing for strategic leadership

Nearly half of teams still release untested code due to time pressure, creating fragile systems and widening risk exposure. Legacy architectures further compound this, making modernisation difficult and slowing down automated validation,” he said. AI-generated code also introduces new vulnerabilities. Without strong validation pipelines, testing quickly becomes the bottleneck of transformation. Developers often view testing as tedious, and with modern codebases spanning multiple interconnected applications, the challenge intensifies. At the same time, misalignment between leadership and engineering teams leads to unclear priorities and rushed decisions. While the pace of development already feels fast, it is only set to accelerate. To overcome barriers, CIOs can adopt model-based, codeless AI testing that reduces dependence on fragile code-level automation and cuts ongoing maintenance. This approach can reduce manual effort by 80%–90% and enables non-technical experts to participate through natural-language and visual test generation. For Wong, strong governance is vital. This entails domain-trained, testing-specific AI that avoids hallucinations and supports safe, transparent validation. Instead of becoming autonomous, AI can act as a co-pilot working alongside developers. “By aligning teams, modernising toolchains, and embedding guardrails, CIOs can shift from reactive firefighting to proactive, AI-driven quality engineering,” he said.


The Architect’s Dilemma: Choose a Proven Path or Pave Your Own Way?

Platforms and frameworks are like paved roads that may help a team progress faster on their journey, with well-defined "exit ramps" or extension points where a team can extend the platform to meet their needs, but they come with side-effects that may make them undesirable. Teams need to decide when, if ever, they need to leave the path others have paved and find their own way by developing extensions to the platform or framework, or by developing new platforms or frameworks. The challenge teams face when they use platforms or frameworks as the basis for their software architectures is to choose the "paved road" (platform or framework) that gets them closest to their desired destination with minimal diversions or new construction. ... Many platform decisions are innocuous and can be accepted and ignored when they don’t affect the QARs that the team needs to meet. The only way to know whether the decisions are harmful is through experiments that expose when the platform is failing to meet the goals of the system. Since the decisions made by the platform developers are often undocumented and/or unknowable, it’s imperative that teams be able to test their system (including the platforms on which they are built) to make sure that their architectural goals (i.e. QARs) are being met. ... Using the "paved road" metaphor, the LLM provides a proven path but it does not take the team where they need to go. When this happens, they have no choice but to either start extending the platform (if they can), finding a different platform, or building their own platform.


Supply chains, AI, and the cloud: The biggest failures (and one success) of 2025

By compromising a single target with a large number of downstream users—say a cloud service or maintainers or developers of widely used open source or proprietary software—attackers can infect potentially millions of the target’s downstream users. ... Another significant security story cast both Meta and Yandex as the villains. Both companies were caught exploiting an Android weakness that allowed them to de-anonymize visitors so years of their browsing histories could be tracked. The covert tracking—implemented in the Meta Pixel and Yandex Metrica trackers—allowed Meta and Yandex to bypass core security and privacy protections provided by both the Android operating system and browsers that run on it. ... The outage with the biggest impact came in October, when a single point of failure inside Amazon’s sprawling network took out vital services worldwide. It lasted 15 hours and 32 minutes. The root cause that kicked off a chain of events was a software bug in the software that monitors the stability of load balances by, among other things, periodically creating new DNS configurations for endpoints within the Amazon Web Services network. A race condition—a type of bug that makes a process dependent on the timing or sequence of events that are variable and outside the developers’ control—caused a key component inside the network to experience “unusually high delays needing to retry its update on several of the DNS endpoint,” Amazon said in a post-mortem.


The Evolving Cybersecurity Challenge for Critical Infrastructure

Convergence between OT, IT and the cloud is providing cybercriminal groups with the opportunity to target critical infrastructure. Operators, and regulators, are wrestling with new technology and new manufacturers, outside the traditional OT/ICS supply chain. “With the geopolitical tensions and the way that the world will look in maybe a few years, they're starting to scratch their heads and think, ‘okay, is it secure? Is it safe? How was it developed? Is there any remote access? How is it being configured?’ There are things that are being done now, that will have an effect in a few years’ time,” cautioned Daniel dos Santos, head of security research at Forescout's Vedere Labs. Given the lifespans of operational technology, installing insecure equipment now can have long-term consequences. Meanwhile, CISOs face dealing with older hardware that was not designed for modern threats. Even where vendors release patches, CNI operators do not always apply them, either because of concerns about business interruption, or a lack of visibility. ... Threats to CNI are not likely to abate in 2026. Legislators are putting more emphasis on cyber resilience and directives, such as the EU’s Cyber Resilience Act, will improve the security of connected devices. But these upgrades take time. “Threats from criminal groups continue to grow exponentially,” said Phil Tonkin, CTO at OT security specialists Dragos


The changing role of the MSP: What does this mean for security?

MSPs hold a unique position within the IT ecosystem, as they are often responsible for managing and supporting the IT infrastructures, cloud services, and cybersecurity of many different organizations. These trusted partners often have privileged access to the inner workings of the organizations they support, including access to the critical systems, sensitive information, and intellectual property of their clients. ... Research shows that over half of MSP leaders globally believe that their customers are at more risk today than this time last year when it comes to cyber threats, with AI-based attack vectors, ransomware/malware, and insider threats the most commonly faced threats. As a result of this uptick in threats, more organizations than ever are leaning on MSPs for cyber support. In fact, in 2025, 84% of MSPs managed either their clients’ cyber infrastructure or their cyber and IT estates combined. This increased significantly, from 64% the previous year. What this shows is that SMEs are realising that they cannot handle cybersecurity alone, turning to MSPs for additional help. Cybersecurity is no longer an optional extra or add-on; it’s becoming a core, expected service for MSPs. MSP leaders are transitioning from general IT support to becoming essential cybersecurity guardians. ... MSPs that adapt by investing in specialized cybersecurity expertise, advanced technologies, and a proactive security posture will thrive, becoming indispensable partners to businesses navigating the complex world of cyber risk. 


What’s next for Azure containers?

Until now, even though Azure has had deep eBPF support, you’ve had to bring your own eBPF tools and manage them yourself, which does require expertise to run at scale. Not everyone is a Kubernetes platform engineer, and with tools like AKS providing a managed environment for cloud-native applications, having a managed eBPF environment is an important upgrade. The new Azure Managed Cilium tool provides a quick way of getting that benefit in your applications, using it for host routing and significantly reducing the overhead that comes with iptables-based networking. ... Declarative policies let Azure lock down container features to reduce the risk of compromised container images affecting other users. At the same time, it’s working to secure the underlying host OS, which for ACI is Linux. SELinux allows Microsoft to lock that image down, providing an immutable host OS. However, those SELinux policies don’t cross the boundary into containers, leaving their userspace vulnerable. ... Having a policy-driven approach to security helps quickly remediate issues. If, say, a common container layer has a vulnerability, you can build and verify a patch layer and deploy it quickly. There’s no need to patch everything in the container, only the relevant components. Microsoft has been doing this for OS features for some time now as part of its internal Project Copacetic, and it’s extending the process to common runtimes and libraries, building patches with updated packages for tools like Python.

No comments:

Post a Comment