Daily Tech Digest - February 17, 2026


Quote for the day:

"If you want to become the best leader you can be, you need to pay the price of self-discipline." -- John C. Maxwell



6 reasons why autonomous enterprises are still more a vision than reality

"AI is the first technology that allows systems that can reason and learn to be integrated into real business processes," Vohra said. ... Autonomous organizations, he continued, "are built on human-AI agent collaboration, where AI handles speed and scale, leaving judgment and strategy up to humans." They are defined by "AI systems that go beyond just generating insights in silos, which is how most enterprises are currently leveraging AI," he added. Now, the momentum is toward "executing decisions across workflows with humans setting intent and guardrails." ... The survey highlighted that work is required to help develop agents. Only 3% of organizations -- and 10% of leaders -- are actively implementing agentic orchestration. "This limited adoption signals that orchestration is still an emerging discipline," the report stated. "The scarcity of orchestration is a litmus test for both internal capability and external strategic positioning. Successful orchestration requires integrating AI into workflows, systems, and decision loops with precision and accountability." ... Workforce capability gaps continue to be the most frequently cited organizational constraint to AI adoption, as reported by six in 10 executives -- yet only 45% say their organizations offer AI training for all employees. ... As AI takes on more execution and pattern recognition, human value increasingly shifts toward system design, integration, governance, and judgment -- areas where trust, context, and accountability still sit firmly with people.


Finding the key to the AI agent control plane

Agents change the physics of risk. As I’ve noted, an agent doesn’t just recommend code. It can run the migration, open the ticket, change the permission, send the email, or approve the refund. As such, risk shifts from legal liability to existential reality. If a large language model hallucinates, you get a bad paragraph. ... Every time an AI system makes a mistake that a human has to clean up, the real cost of that system goes up. The only way to lower that tax is to stop treating governance as a policy problem and start treating it as architecture. That means least privilege for agents, not just humans. It means separating “draft” from “send.” It means making “read-only” a first-class capability, not an afterthought. It means auditable action logs and reversible workflows. It means designing your agent system as if it will be attacked because it will be. ... Right now, permissions are a mess of vendor-specific toggles. One platform has its own way of scoping actions. Another bolts on an approval workflow. A third punts the problem to your identity and access management team. That fragmentation will slow adoption, not accelerate it. Enterprises can’t scale agents until they can express simple rules. We need to be able to say that an agent can read production data but not write to it. We need to say an agent can draft emails but not send them. We need to say an agent can provision infrastructure only inside a sandbox, with quotas, or that it must request human approval before any destructive action.


PAM in Multi‑Cloud Infrastructure: Strategies for Effective Implementation

The "Identity Gap" has emerged as the leading cause of cloud security breaches. Traditional vault-based Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions, designed for static server environments, are inadequate for today’s dynamic, API-driven cloud infrastructure. ... PAM has evolved from an optional security measure to an essential and fundamental requirement in multi-cloud environments. This shift is attributed to the increased complexity, decentralized structure, and rapid changes characteristic of modern cloud architectures. As organizations distribute workloads across AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, and on-premises systems, traditional security perimeters have become obsolete, positioning identity and privileged access as central elements of contemporary security strategies. ... Fragmented identity systems hinder multi‑cloud PAM. Centralizing identity and federating access resolves this, with a Unified Identity and Access Foundation managing all digital identities—human or machine—across the organization. This approach removes silos between on-premises, cloud, and legacy applications, providing a single control point for authentication, authorization, and lifecycle management. ... Cloud providers deliver robust IAM tools, but their features vary. A strong PAM approach aligns these tools using RBAC and ABAC. RBAC assigns permissions by job role for easy scaling, while ABAC uses user and environment attributes for tight security.


Giving AI ‘hands’ in your SaaS stack

If an attacker manages to use an indirect prompt injection — hiding malicious instructions in a calendar invite or a web page the agent reads — that agent essentially becomes a confused deputy. It has the keys to the kingdom. It can delete opportunities, export customer lists or modify pricing configurations. ... For AI agents, this means we must treat them as non-human identities (NHIs) with the same or greater scrutiny than we apply to employees. ... The industry is coalescing around the model context protocol (MCP) as a standard for this layer. It provides a universal USB-C port for connecting AI models to your data sources. By using an MCP server as your gateway, you ensure the agent never sees the credentials or the full API surface area, only the tools you explicitly allow. ... We need to treat AI actions with the same reverence. My rule for autonomous agents is simple: If it can’t dry run, it doesn’t ship. Every state-changing tool exposed to an agent must support a dry_run=true mode. When the agent wants to update a record, it first calls the tool in dry-run mode. The system returns a diff — a preview of exactly what will change . This allows us to implement a human-in-the-loop approval gate for high-risk actions. The agent proposes the change, the human confirms it and only then is the live transaction executed. ... As CIOs and IT leaders, our job isn’t to say “no” to AI. It’s to build the invisible rails that allow the business to say “yes” safely. By focusing on gateways, identity and transactional safety, we can give AI the hands it needs to do real work, without losing our grip on the wheel.


AI-fuelled supply chain cyber attacks surge in Asia-Pacific

Exposed credentials, source code, API keys and internal communications can provide detailed insight into business processes, supplier relationships and technology stacks. When combined with brokered access, that information can support impersonation, targeted intrusion and fraud activity that blends in with legitimate use. One area of concern is open-source software distribution, where widely used libraries can spread malicious code at scale. ... The report points to AI-assisted phishing campaigns that target OAuth flows and other single sign-on mechanisms. These techniques can bypass multi-factor authentication where users approve malicious prompts or where tokens are stolen after login. ... "AI did not create supply chain attacks, it has made them cheaper, faster, and harder to detect," Mr Volkov added. "Unchecked trust in software and services is now a strategic liability." The report names a range of actors associated with supply-chain-focused activity, including Lazarus, Scattered Spider, HAFNIUM, DragonForce and 888, as well as campaigns linked to Shai-Hulud. It said these groups illustrate how criminal organisations and state-aligned operators are targeting similar platforms and integration layers. ... The report's focus on upstream compromise reflects a broader trend in cyber risk management, where organisations assess not only their own exposure but also the resilience of vendors and technology supply chains.


Automation cannot come at the cost of accountability; trust has to be embedded into the architecture

Visa is actively working with issuers, merchants, and payment aggregators to roll out authentication mechanisms based on global standards. “Consumers want payments to be invisible,” Chhabra adds. “They want to enjoy the shopping experience, not struggle through the payment process.” Tokenisation plays a critical role in enabling this vision. By replacing sensitive card details with unique digital tokens, Visa has created a secure foundation for tap-and-pay, in-app purchases, and cross-border transactions. In India alone, nearly half a billion cards have already been tokenised. “Once tokenisation is in place, device-based payments and seamless commerce become possible,” Chhabra explains. “It’s the bedrock of frictionless payments.” Fraud prevention, however, is no longer limited to card-based transactions. With real-time and account-to-account payments gaining momentum, Visa has expanded its scope through strategic acquisitions such as Featurespace. The UK-based firm specialises in behavioural analytics for real-time fraud detection, an area Chhabra describes as increasingly critical. “We don’t just want to detect fraud on the Visa network. We want to help prevent fraud across payment types and networks,” he says. Before deploying such capabilities in India, Visa conducts extensive back-testing using localised data and works closely with regulators. “Global intelligence is powerful, but it has to be adapted to local behaviour. You can’t simply overfit global models to India’s unique payment patterns.”


Most ransomware playbooks don't address machine credentials. Attackers know it.

The gap between ransomware threats and the defenses meant to stop them is getting worse, not better. Ivanti’s 2026 State of Cybersecurity Report found that the preparedness gap widened by an average of 10 points year over year across every threat category the firm tracks. ... The accompanying Ransomware Playbook Toolkit walks teams through four phases: containment, analysis, remediation, and recovery. The credential reset step instructs teams to ensure all affected user and device accounts are reset. Service accounts are absent. So are API keys, tokens, and certificates. The most widely used playbook framework in enterprise security stops at human and device credentials. The organizations following it inherit that blind spot without realizing it. ... “Although defenders are optimistic about the promise of AI in cybersecurity, Ivanti’s findings also show companies are falling further behind in terms of how well prepared they are to defend against a variety of threats,” said Daniel Spicer, Ivanti’s Chief Security Officer. “This is what I call the ‘Cybersecurity Readiness Deficit,’ a persistent, year-over-year widening imbalance in an organization’s ability to defend their data, people, and networks against the evolving threat landscape.” ... You can’t reset credentials that you don’t know exist. Service accounts, API keys, and tokens need ownership assignments mapped pre-incident. Discovering them mid-breach costs days.


CISO Julie Chatman offers insights for you to take control of your security leadership role

In a few high-profile cases, security leaders have faced criminal charges for how they handled breach disclosures, and civil enforcement for how they reported risks to investors and regulators. The trend is toward holding CISOs personally accountable for governance and disclosure decisions. ... You’re seeing the rise of fractional CISOs, virtual CISOs, heads of IT security instead of full CISO titles. It’s a lot harder to hold a fractional CISO personally liable. This is relatively new. The liability conversation really intensified after some high-profile enforcement actions, and now we’re seeing the market respond. ... First, negotiate protection upfront. When you’re thinking about accepting a CISO role, explicitly ask about D&O insurance coverage. If the CISO is not considered a director or an officer of the company and can’t be given D&O coverage, will the company subsidize individual coverage? There are companies now selling CISO-specific policies. Make this part of your compensation negotiation. Second, do your job well but understand the paradox. Sometimes when you do your job properly, you’re labeled ‘the office of no,’ you’re seen as ‘difficult,’ and you last 18 months. It’s a catch-22. Real liability protection is changing how your organization thinks about risk ownership. Most organizations don’t have a unified view of risk or the vocabulary to discuss it properly. If you can advance that as a CISO, you can help the business understand that risk is theirs to accept, not yours.


The AI bubble will burst for firms that can’t get beyond demos and LLMs

Even though the discussion of a potential bubble is ubiquitous, what’s going on is more nuanced than simple boom-and-bust chatter, said Francisco Martin-Rayo, CEO of Helios AI. “What people are really debating is the gap between valuation and real-world impact. Many companies are labeled ‘AI-driven,’ but only a subset are delivering measurable value at scale,” Martin-Rayo said. Founders confuse fundraising with progress, which comes only when they are solving real problems for real clients, said Nacho De Marco, founder of BairesDev. “Fundraising gives you dopamine, but real progress comes from customers,” De Marco said. “The real value of a $1B valuation is customer validation.” ... The AI shakeout has already started, and the tenor at WEF “feels less like peak hype and more like the beginning of a sorting process,” Martin-Rayo said. ... Companies that survive the coming shakeout will be those willing to rebuild operations from the ground up rather than throwing AI into existing workflows, said Jinsook Han, chief agentic AI officer at Genpact. ”It’s not about just bolting some AI into your existing operation,” Han said. “You have to really build from ground up — it’s a complete operating model change.” Foundational models are becoming more mature and can do more of what startups sell. As a result, AI providers that don’t offer distinct value will have a tough time surviving, Han said.


What could make the EU Digital Identity Wallets fail?

Large-scale digital identity initiatives rarely fail because the technology does not work. They fail because adoption, incentives, trust, and accountability are underestimated. The EU Digital Identity Wallet could still fail, or partially fail, succeeding in some countries while struggling or stagnating in others. ... A realistic risk is fragmented success. Some member states are likely to deliver robust wallets on time. Others may launch late, with limited functionality, or without meaningful uptake. A smaller group may fail to deliver a convincing solution at all, at least in the first phase. From the perspective of users and service providers, this fragmentation already undermines cross border usage. If wallets differ significantly in capabilities, attributes, and reliability across borders, the promise of a seamless European digital identity weakens. ... While EU Digital Identity Wallets offer significantly higher security than current solutions, they will not eliminate fraud entirely. There will still be cases of wallets issued to the wrong individual, phishing attempts, and wallet takeovers. If early fraud cases are poorly handled or publicly misunderstood, trust in the ecosystem could erode quickly. The wallet’s strong privacy architecture introduces real trade-offs. One uncomfortable but necessary question worth asking is: are we going too far with privacy? ... The EU Digital Identity Wallet will succeed only if policymakers, wallet providers, and service providers treat trust, economics, and usability as core design principles, not secondary concerns.

No comments:

Post a Comment