Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into key industries such as finance, healthcare, infrastructure, and national security. As organizations rush to embrace AI, they inadvertently expose themselves to new security risks that legacy cybersecurity frameworks are ill-equipped to handle. The rapid adoption of AI presents unique challenges that traditional cybersecurity measures, primarily designed for conventional software systems, cannot address effectively. The alarm has been sounded: AI security is the new zero-day vulnerability, and we are not prepared to deal with it.

While industries continue to embed AI into critical systems, the pace at which AI security risks are being addressed is far behind. Traditional cybersecurity measures often treat AI vulnerabilities as they would any other software flaw, expecting solutions such as patches or security updates. However, AI security presents fundamentally different challenges that cannot be resolved using the same approaches. Without swift reforms to existing security strategies, the consequences could be catastrophic.

The Limitations of Traditional Software Security and Its Applicability to AI Systems

For many years, the software industry has relied on a framework known as the Common Vulnerability Exposure (CVE) process to handle security. This method has played a crucial role in identifying, reporting, and assessing software vulnerabilities. When a vulnerability is detected and verified, it is assigned a severity score, which is based on the potential damage it can cause. This allows the cybersecurity community to prioritize mitigation strategies, patches, and fixes in order of urgency.

The CVE system has proven effective for traditional software applications, where vulnerabilities are typically identified in lines of code. Once these issues are discovered, they can often be rectified through fixes, patches, or updates to the affected software. However, this approach does not work as effectively when it comes to modern AI systems, which rely on machine learning algorithms, vast datasets, and complex, evolving behaviors. The dynamic nature of AI makes it difficult to apply static methods like CVE to the detection and resolution of vulnerabilities specific to AI technologies.

In traditional software, vulnerabilities are relatively straightforward—they can be traced back to coding errors or misconfigurations, which are often easy to address. In contrast, AI systems introduce new layers of complexity, as their vulnerabilities may not be immediately apparent or easily isolated. These systems are continuously evolving, and their behaviors can change over time, making it more difficult to pinpoint potential weaknesses.

AI Security: A New Paradigm of Risks and Challenges

Unlike conventional software systems, AI systems are dynamic and capable of learning from large datasets. This means that the vulnerabilities in these systems may not originate from a single line of faulty code, but rather from shifting system behaviors, flaws in the training data, or subtle manipulations that alter the outputs without setting off conventional security alarms. For instance, an AI model trained on biased or incomplete data may produce biased results without any clear indication of the underlying flaw. These vulnerabilities cannot always be detected by traditional security scans or patches.

Furthermore, AI models, such as machine learning algorithms, are not static entities—they are constantly learning and adapting. This creates a moving target for cybersecurity teams, as the behavior of an AI system might change over time as it is exposed to new data or feedback loops. What was once considered secure behavior may no longer be valid as the system evolves, making it much harder to detect vulnerabilities that may emerge in real time.

Another issue with traditional security frameworks is that they focus on identifying specific code flaws or exploits that can be addressed with a simple patch or update. AI vulnerabilities, however, often lie in areas such as the model’s learned behaviors or its interaction with external data. These types of flaws are much harder to pin down, let alone fix. It’s not always clear where the problem lies, or even how it manifests, until it is exploited.

Moreover, in AI systems, vulnerabilities may be introduced by the data used for training models. Data poisoning, for instance, involves manipulating the training data to deliberately alter the behavior of the model, often without being detected by conventional security tools. This represents a significant challenge because traditional security models focus on defending against exploits in code, rather than in the underlying data that fuels AI systems.

The Incompatibility of CVE with AI Vulnerabilities

CVE, the backbone of traditional software security, was designed to address static vulnerabilities within code. In many ways, CVE works well for this purpose, providing an established process to manage vulnerabilities in software systems. However, when it comes to AI, this system proves inadequate. The reason lies in the fundamental differences between traditional software and AI-based systems. While software vulnerabilities can often be fixed by modifying or patching the code, AI vulnerabilities are more complex and often require a deep understanding of how the AI model works, how it interacts with data, and how it adapts over time.

The reliance on CVE to handle AI security is problematic because it doesn’t account for the behavior of AI systems. Since AI models continuously learn from new data and evolve their outputs, the vulnerabilities they face cannot always be traced back to a single flaw in the code. Instead, they arise from more complex, evolving relationships within the system’s architecture and the datasets it processes. In this context, CVE’s focus on static flaws fails to capture the dynamic and multifaceted nature of AI security risks.

In addition, many AI security flaws may not present themselves immediately. A vulnerability might exist in an AI model, but its impact may only become apparent under certain conditions, such as when the model encounters a specific type of data or is manipulated by an external actor. This delay in recognizing the vulnerability makes it even harder to apply traditional security measures like CVE, which rely on timely identification and rapid response.

The Need for a New Approach to AI Security

Given the limitations of traditional security approaches like CVE, it is clear that AI security requires a different framework. Traditional software vulnerabilities are often relatively easy to identify and mitigate because they are tied directly to code. However, AI vulnerabilities are deeply rooted in the model’s structure, training data, and ongoing interactions with the environment. As AI continues to evolve and become more integrated into critical systems across various industries, it is crucial that security protocols are updated to meet these new challenges.

One potential solution is to develop new security frameworks that are specifically designed to handle the complexities of AI. These frameworks should take into account the unique challenges posed by AI systems, including their dynamic nature, the role of training data, and the possibility of adversarial attacks. Rather than relying on static definitions of vulnerabilities, these new frameworks should focus on the overall behavior and performance of AI systems, monitoring them for signs of malfunction or manipulation over time.

Additionally, AI systems should be subject to continuous security testing and validation to ensure that they are not vulnerable to new types of attacks as they evolve. This process should be integrated into the development lifecycle of AI systems, ensuring that security concerns are addressed from the outset and throughout the model’s lifespan. AI vendors should also prioritize transparency, allowing for independent security audits and creating more robust systems for disclosing vulnerabilities as they are discovered.

Moving Beyond Static Models of Security

The complexity of AI systems means that we can no longer rely solely on traditional, static models of security that focus on code vulnerabilities. As AI technology continues to evolve, so too must our approach to safeguarding it. Traditional security frameworks like CVE are insufficient for dealing with the nuances and complexities of AI-based vulnerabilities.

Instead, the cybersecurity community must develop new, adaptive strategies that are capable of addressing the specific risks associated with AI. These strategies should prioritize continuous monitoring, behavior analysis, and the ability to respond to emerging threats in real-time. By embracing these more dynamic approaches, we can better protect AI systems from the wide range of potential vulnerabilities that could arise in the future.

As AI becomes increasingly embedded in industries ranging from healthcare to finance, the security of these systems will become even more critical. A failure to adapt our security practices to address the unique challenges of AI could lead to devastating consequences. The time to rethink our approach to AI security is now, and the industry must work together to create a more robust, forward-thinking security infrastructure that can protect against the evolving threats posed by AI systems.

Uncovering the Hidden Dangers of AI: Vulnerabilities Beneath the Surface

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly become an integral part of our digital landscape, with large language models (LLMs) being among the most impactful and widely used. These models are often accessed via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), which serve as gateways for applications to interact with the AI systems. While these APIs are essential for the functionality of AI services, they can also represent a significant security risk. As AI becomes increasingly pervasive, understanding the potential vulnerabilities lurking behind the surface is crucial.

One of the most pressing concerns in AI security revolves around the vulnerabilities associated with APIs. The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has raised alarms about the growing security risks posed by API-related issues in AI systems. Many of these vulnerabilities stem from weaknesses in the API security layer, making them a critical focus for researchers and security professionals alike. As these models become more powerful and widespread, addressing these risks has never been more urgent.

The Role of APIs in AI Security

APIs play a vital role in enabling communication between AI models and other applications or services. They allow developers to integrate AI functionality into their software, making it possible to perform tasks such as natural language processing, image recognition, and data analysis. However, while APIs are essential for the seamless operation of AI, they also represent a significant vector for potential attacks.

API vulnerabilities are a growing concern, particularly in the context of AI systems, where data flows and access points are often complex and difficult to monitor. When not properly secured, APIs can become gateways for unauthorized users or malicious actors to gain access to sensitive AI models and their underlying data. As the primary points of interaction with AI systems, APIs can expose critical weaknesses that cybercriminals can exploit, leading to security breaches, data theft, or even manipulation of the AI system itself.

API Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs)

Many of the risks associated with AI systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), can be traced back to vulnerabilities in API security. LLMs, which are designed to process vast amounts of data and generate human-like text, rely on APIs to facilitate communication between the model and external applications. However, these models are not immune to the same security risks that affect other API-driven systems.

Common API vulnerabilities, such as hardcoded credentials, improper authentication mechanisms, or weak security keys, can leave LLMs exposed to malicious actors. In some cases, these vulnerabilities can allow attackers to bypass security controls and gain unauthorized access to the AI model. Once they have access, attackers can manipulate the model, extract sensitive information, or even inject malicious data into the system, compromising the integrity of the model’s outputs.

One of the significant concerns is that many LLMs are trained on vast datasets that include content from the open internet. Unfortunately, the internet is rife with insecure coding practices, weak security protocols, and vulnerabilities. As a result, some of these insecure practices may inadvertently make their way into the training data used for LLMs, creating hidden risks within the model’s architecture. These vulnerabilities might not be immediately apparent, making it difficult for developers to identify and mitigate them before they lead to a security incident.

The Challenge of Reporting AI Vulnerabilities

While recognizing the risks of AI vulnerabilities is a crucial first step, addressing them can be a complex task. One of the main challenges in AI security is the difficulty of reporting and resolving issues related to vulnerabilities. AI models are built using a combination of open-source software, proprietary data, and third-party integrations, which makes it hard to pinpoint who is responsible when something goes wrong. This lack of clarity can lead to delays in identifying and addressing vulnerabilities in the system.

Moreover, many AI projects do not have well-defined or transparent security reporting mechanisms. In traditional software development, there are established channels for responsible disclosure of vulnerabilities, such as bug bounty programs or dedicated security teams. However, the same infrastructure is often lacking in AI development. As a result, researchers and security professionals may struggle to find a proper outlet for reporting vulnerabilities they discover in AI systems.

This gap in the security reporting framework poses a significant challenge for improving the security of AI models. Without clear channels for disclosure, it becomes more difficult for AI developers to learn about potential risks and respond to them in a timely manner. In turn, this lack of transparency hinders efforts to strengthen AI security and ensure that vulnerabilities are addressed before they can be exploited by malicious actors.

The Compounding Risk of Third-Party Integrations

Another layer of complexity in AI security arises from the reliance on third-party services and integrations. Many AI models depend on external data sources, APIs, or services to function correctly. While these integrations can enhance the capabilities of AI systems, they also introduce additional security risks.

When integrating third-party components, AI developers must trust that these services follow proper security practices. However, if any of the third-party components have vulnerabilities, those risks can be inherited by the AI system. This is particularly problematic when external services do not adhere to the same security standards as the AI model itself, potentially introducing weaknesses that could compromise the entire system.

Furthermore, the use of third-party integrations can obscure the root cause of a security issue. If a vulnerability arises due to a flaw in an external service, it may be challenging to trace the problem back to its source. This can lead to delays in addressing the issue and make it harder for organizations to take appropriate action. As AI systems become increasingly interconnected with third-party services, it is crucial for developers to ensure that all components, both internal and external, are secure and adhere to best practices.

The Growing Threat of Adversarial Attacks

In addition to API-related vulnerabilities, AI systems, including LLMs, are also vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Adversarial attacks involve manipulating the input data fed into an AI model to cause it to produce incorrect or malicious outputs. In the case of LLMs, this could mean generating harmful or biased content based on subtle manipulations of the input text.

These attacks can be particularly difficult to detect because they often exploit the underlying structure of the AI model itself. While some adversarial attacks are easy to identify, others are more sophisticated and may go unnoticed by both developers and users. As AI systems become more widespread and are used in critical applications, such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous vehicles, the potential impact of adversarial attacks becomes increasingly concerning.

Mitigating adversarial attacks requires a multi-layered approach, including robust input validation, model monitoring, and ongoing security testing. Developers must continuously assess the vulnerability of AI models to such attacks and implement strategies to protect against them.

The Evolving Nature of AI Models and the Emerging Security Challenges

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are far from static; they are dynamic entities that continuously evolve as they interact with new data, adapt to changing environments, and refine their internal models. This ongoing evolution poses significant challenges for security teams, who traditionally treat AI systems like static software, which can be patched and updated in a straightforward manner. The dynamic nature of AI models creates unique security risks that are often difficult to anticipate or mitigate, leading to potential vulnerabilities that can emerge without clear warnings.

One of the primary concerns with AI systems is that they do not adhere to the same principles of software maintenance as traditional applications. In conventional software development, security issues are usually addressed by applying patches or issuing updates that fix specific lines of code. These updates are typically quick and effective because software behavior is relatively predictable and does not change unless explicitly modified. However, AI models do not operate in the same way. The nature of AI models, especially those based on machine learning, means that their behavior evolves over time as they process more data and learn from new experiences. This creates a security landscape that is constantly shifting, making it increasingly difficult for security teams to manage and protect these systems.

AI security risks, such as model drift, feedback loops, and adversarial manipulation, can develop over time, often in ways that are not immediately apparent. Model drift occurs when an AI model’s predictions or decisions become less accurate over time as the data it is trained on changes or diverges from the original data distribution. This gradual shift in behavior can be subtle and difficult to detect, especially in complex systems that operate on vast datasets. For instance, an AI system trained to detect fraudulent transactions might begin to miss certain types of fraud as the methods of fraud evolve, but these issues may not be immediately noticeable to the end user.

Feedback loops, another concern, arise when an AI system’s actions inadvertently influence the data it receives in the future. For example, a recommendation algorithm used by a social media platform might prioritize content that generates the most engagement, such as sensational or misleading posts, creating a cycle where the AI model reinforces harmful behaviors. This continuous feedback loop can lead to the amplification of biases or the spread of misinformation, further complicating security and ethical concerns.

Adversarial manipulation is another significant threat to AI security. Adversarial attacks involve intentionally altering input data to mislead the AI system into making incorrect predictions or decisions. These attacks are often subtle and can be difficult for humans to detect, but they can have catastrophic consequences. For instance, adversarial attacks have been demonstrated on AI-powered facial recognition systems, where slight modifications to images can cause the system to misidentify individuals, potentially leading to security breaches or violations of privacy.

The traditional methods of addressing security vulnerabilities—such as issuing software patches—are inadequate when it comes to AI systems. While traditional software issues are often the result of a bug in the code that can be fixed with a quick update, AI vulnerabilities are typically more complex. Many AI security problems stem from the model itself, often linked to issues in the training data, model architecture, or the interaction between various components. These problems cannot always be resolved by simply fixing a bug or issuing a patch. Instead, they may require more sophisticated interventions, such as retraining the model on a new dataset, adjusting the model’s architecture, or implementing better safeguards against adversarial inputs.

Furthermore, the idea of a “quick fix” is often unworkable in the context of AI models that continuously learn and adapt. What constitutes “secure” behavior for an AI system is a moving target, and what works to secure the system today might not be effective tomorrow as the model evolves. Unlike traditional software, where security is often defined by fixed standards and protocols, AI security is more fluid. Security teams must deal with the challenge of maintaining a secure system while also allowing the AI to learn, adapt, and improve over time. This requires a more nuanced approach to security, one that can keep pace with the dynamic nature of AI systems.

As AI models continue to evolve, the security challenges are likely to become even more pronounced. The increasing complexity of AI systems, along with their growing integration into critical infrastructure, means that the potential risks and consequences of AI-related vulnerabilities are higher than ever. For instance, AI models are being used in autonomous vehicles, healthcare systems, and financial markets, where even small errors or vulnerabilities can have catastrophic results. As these models evolve, new types of vulnerabilities will likely emerge, and traditional security methods will struggle to keep up with the pace of change.

The inability to define a clear “secure” state for AI systems presents an ongoing challenge for cybersecurity teams. In traditional software security, it is relatively easy to determine whether a system is secure or not by comparing its behavior against known benchmarks or standards. With AI, however, security teams face a much more complex situation. AI systems can continuously learn and change, and determining what constitutes “secure” behavior may not be straightforward. For example, an AI system might make a decision that is deemed secure today but could lead to undesirable consequences in the future as the model adapts to new data or experiences.

As a result, cybersecurity teams must rethink their strategies for managing AI systems. Traditional methods of monitoring, patching, and updating software are no longer sufficient. Instead, security practices for AI models must evolve to address the unique challenges posed by dynamic, learning-based systems. This could involve developing new tools and frameworks for monitoring the ongoing behavior of AI models, identifying vulnerabilities early in the learning process, and creating safeguards that can adapt to changing circumstances. Moreover, AI security will require collaboration between AI developers, data scientists, and security professionals to ensure that the models are both effective and secure.

A Critical Failure: The Urgent Need for a Fresh Approach to AI Security

The failure to adequately address security threats specific to artificial intelligence (AI) systems is not merely a technical lapse; it represents a systemic failure with far-reaching and potentially catastrophic consequences. Traditional cybersecurity methods, designed to address conventional software vulnerabilities, are ill-equipped to handle the unique risks posed by AI technologies. These systems are vulnerable to attacks that are radically different from those encountered by traditional software, such as adversarial inputs, model inversion attacks, and data poisoning attempts. Unfortunately, cybersecurity professionals who are trained to defend against typical software flaws often overlook the specific risks associated with AI.

As AI continues to be integrated into more industries and sectors, the urgency to address these gaps in security becomes increasingly critical. While there have been some promising initiatives, such as the UK’s AI security code of practice, these efforts have not yet led to meaningful progress in securing AI systems. In fact, the industry continues to make the same errors that resulted in past security failures. The current state of AI security is concerning, as it lacks a structured framework for vulnerability reporting, clear definitions of what constitutes an AI security flaw, and the willingness to adapt the existing Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) process to address AI-specific risks. As the gaps in AI security grow, the potential consequences of failing to act could be devastating.

One of the most significant issues in addressing AI security is the lack of transparency and standardized reporting practices for AI vulnerabilities. Unlike conventional software, where security flaws can be relatively easily identified and categorized, AI systems present a new set of challenges. These systems are inherently complex, involving large datasets, machine learning models, and intricate dependencies that are difficult to document and track. This complexity makes it nearly impossible for cybersecurity teams to assess whether their AI systems are exposed to known threats. Without a standardized AI Bill of Materials (AIBOM) — a comprehensive record of the datasets, model architectures, and dependencies that form the backbone of an AI system — cybersecurity professionals lack the tools to effectively evaluate and safeguard these systems.

The absence of such an AI Bill of Materials is a critical oversight. Just as manufacturers rely on a bill of materials to document the components and processes involved in their products, AI developers need a similar record to track the intricate details of their models. Without this, the ability to audit AI systems for vulnerabilities becomes severely limited, and potential threats can go undetected until they result in an actual breach or failure. This lack of visibility not only hampers efforts to secure AI systems but also perpetuates a cycle of security neglect, leaving organizations exposed to evolving threats.

Furthermore, the failure to adapt traditional security frameworks to AI-specific risks adds to the problem. The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) system, which has long been used to catalog software vulnerabilities, was not designed with AI in mind. While the CVE system works well for conventional software, it is ill-suited to handle the nuances of AI-specific flaws. For example, attacks such as adversarial inputs — where malicious data is fed into an AI system to manipulate its behavior — do not fit neatly into the existing CVE framework. These types of vulnerabilities require a different approach to detection, classification, and response. Until the CVE system is modified to account for these risks, AI systems will remain inadequately protected.

The current state of AI security also suffers from a lack of industry-wide collaboration. While some individual organizations are making strides in securing their AI systems, there is no collective effort to address these issues at scale. AI systems are not developed in isolation; they are interconnected and rely on shared resources, datasets, and technologies. A vulnerability in one AI system can easily ripple across an entire network, affecting other systems that rely on the same data or models. However, without a unified framework for reporting, tracking, and addressing vulnerabilities, organizations are left to fend for themselves, creating fragmented and inconsistent security practices. This siloed approach exacerbates the problem and makes it even more difficult to build a robust, comprehensive security ecosystem for AI.

Another contributing factor to the failure of AI security is the lack of awareness and understanding of the unique risks posed by AI systems. While cybersecurity professionals are well-versed in traditional software vulnerabilities, many are not equipped with the knowledge needed to identify and mitigate AI-specific risks. AI systems operate differently from traditional software, and attacks on AI models often exploit these differences in ways that are not immediately apparent to those trained in conventional cybersecurity. For example, adversarial machine learning attacks, which involve deliberately crafting inputs that cause AI models to make incorrect predictions, require a specialized understanding of how AI models function. Without proper training and expertise in AI security, cybersecurity professionals may struggle to recognize these types of threats, leaving organizations vulnerable to exploitation.

The need for a new approach to AI security is evident, but implementing such a shift will require significant changes across the entire industry. First and foremost, there must be a commitment to developing new standards for AI vulnerability reporting. This includes creating a clear definition of what constitutes an AI security flaw and establishing standardized processes for identifying, documenting, and addressing these vulnerabilities. Just as the CVE system has proven to be effective in the world of conventional software, a similar system tailored to AI-specific risks is crucial for maintaining transparency and accountability.

In addition, there must be greater emphasis on collaboration between organizations, researchers, and cybersecurity professionals. AI security cannot be effectively addressed by individual organizations working in isolation. A collective effort is needed to create a shared understanding of the risks posed by AI systems and to develop solutions that can be applied across the industry. This includes the creation of standardized tools and frameworks, such as the AI Bill of Materials, to provide greater visibility into the components and dependencies of AI systems.

The Need for a Radical Shift in AI Security Practices

To address the security challenges posed by AI, the cybersecurity industry must undergo a radical shift in how it approaches AI security. First and foremost, the idea that AI security can be handled using the same frameworks designed for traditional software must be abandoned. AI systems are fundamentally different from conventional software, and they require specialized security measures that can accommodate their dynamic and evolving nature.

Vendors must be more transparent about the security of their AI systems, allowing for independent security testing and removing the legal barriers that currently prevent vulnerability disclosures. One simple yet effective change would be the introduction of an AI Bill of Materials (AIBOM), which would document all aspects of an AI system, from its underlying dataset to its model architecture and third-party dependencies. This would provide security teams with the necessary information to assess the security posture of AI systems and identify potential vulnerabilities.

Furthermore, the AI industry must foster greater collaboration between cybersecurity experts, developers, and data scientists. A “secure by design” methodology should be championed within the engineering community, with AI-specific threat modeling incorporated into the development process from the outset. The creation of AI-specific security tools and the establishment of clear frameworks for AI vulnerability reporting will be essential in addressing the evolving threats posed by AI.

Conclusion:

AI security is not just a technical issue; it is a strategic imperative. As AI systems become more integrated into every aspect of modern life, the risks posed by security vulnerabilities will only grow. AI security cannot be an afterthought. Without independent scrutiny and the development of AI-specific security practices, vulnerabilities will remain hidden until they are exploited in real-world attacks.

The costs of ignoring AI security are not just theoretical—they are real and growing. As AI becomes more embedded in critical infrastructure, national security, healthcare, and other sectors, the consequences of a breach could be catastrophic. It is time for the cybersecurity industry to recognize the unique challenges posed by AI and take proactive steps to address them. By adopting a new approach to AI security, one that is tailored to the unique characteristics of AI systems, we can better protect ourselves from the threats that are already emerging in this new era of technology.

To mitigate these risks, it is essential for organizations to prioritize AI security at every stage of the development and deployment process. This includes securing APIs, implementing proper access controls, and ensuring transparency in security reporting. Additionally, organizations must adopt best practices for integrating third-party services and monitoring AI models for potential vulnerabilities. By addressing these risks head-on, we can help ensure that AI systems remain safe, reliable, and beneficial for all users.

The security of AI is an ongoing concern that requires collaboration between developers, researchers, and security professionals. Only through a concerted effort can we uncover the hidden vulnerabilities and take the necessary steps to protect AI systems from malicious exploitation.