Connect with us

Business & Technology

Anthropic AI’s Mythos triggers warnings over cyber risk

Published

on


Anthropic AI’s Mythos model has prompted warnings from cyber security specialists, heightening concerns about how generative AI could increase the scale and sophistication of cyberattacks.

The response follows reports that unauthorised users accessed Mythos by simply changing the model name. Security experts say the incident shows how quickly advanced AI systems can move beyond controlled environments into wider circulation.

Security leaders are urging boards and executives in the UK and elsewhere to treat AI-driven cyber risk as a strategic issue. They argue that recent developments expose both the fragility of AI infrastructure and the potential for these systems to industrialise existing cybercrime techniques.

Sujatha S Iyer, Head of AI Security at ManageEngine, Zoho’s IT division, said the emergence of tools such as Mythos should force organisations to rethink their assumptions about threat actors and the speed of attacks.

“As AI lowers the barrier of entry for cybercriminals, the baseline for defence must too rise. Anthropic AI’s Mythos model is a wake-up call – reminding us that cyber resilience isn’t just an IT issue. This is a priority that requires board-level attention,” said Sujatha S Iyer, Head of AI Security, ManageEngine, Zoho.

AI systems built for code analysis, content generation or research can also help attackers. Security professionals say these models can support malicious users with reconnaissance, phishing, vulnerability discovery and exploit development, even when guardrails are in place.

Iyer said AI is changing the mechanics and speed of common attack types, putting new pressure on organisations that still rely on traditional defences.

“We’re entering a phase where attackers can automate reconnaissance, personalise phishing at scale, and identify vulnerabilities faster than many organisations can respond. This fundamentally shifts the balance in favour of threat actors,” said Iyer.

Many businesses still depend on perimeter-based security architectures that assume a clear boundary between trusted internal systems and the outside world. But as cloud services, remote work and software-as-a-service platforms have expanded, that boundary has become less distinct.

Companies now face adversaries that can adapt their methods in near real time, Iyer said.

“What’s critical now is that businesses move away from reactive security models. Traditional perimeter-based approaches are no longer sufficient when threats are becoming more adaptive and intelligent. Instead, organisations need to prioritise continuous monitoring, identity-first security, and rapid incident response capabilities that can keep pace with AI-driven threats,” said Iyer.

Security teams are also focusing on basic operational processes, including patching, configuration management and staff training. Experts say AI-enabled attackers can rapidly scan public-facing systems for known flaws that remain unpatched.

Weaknesses in day-to-day practice often undermine investments in advanced tools, Iyer said.

“There’s also a growing need to strengthen cyber hygiene at every level of the organisation. Even the most advanced tools can be undermined by poor patch management or lack of employee awareness,” said Iyer.

Concerns about Mythos intensified after reports that external users had accessed the model without authorisation. The method described involved changing a model identifier rather than breaching infrastructure through more complex means.

Shane Fry, Chief Technology Officer at RunSafe Security, said the incident illustrates how exposed AI systems can become even when providers intend to limit access.

“Unauthorized users were able to access Anthropic’s Mythos model, reportedly by just changing a model name. Even if their intent is just to explore, it shows how easily these systems can be exposed. The reality is these AI capabilities are already out there, ‘hacked’ or not, and they’re going to accelerate how quickly vulnerabilities are found and exploited. Software teams will need to look at how to harden their code so those vulnerabilities can’t be used in the first place,” said Shane Fry, Chief Technology Officer, RunSafe Security.

Security practitioners say the Mythos episode raises questions about access control, monitoring and logging for advanced models. It also highlights how powerful AI systems, once exposed, can become part of the wider cyber ecosystem regardless of a vendor’s policies.

For UK organisations, the comments from Iyer and Fry reflect a broader shift in cyber security thinking. Boards are being asked to treat AI as both a tool for defence and a risk multiplier for adversaries.

Vendors and security teams are now assessing how AI models can be integrated into monitoring and response workflows without creating new attack surfaces. At the same time, they are examining how adversaries might use the same class of models to probe public infrastructure, corporate networks and the software supply chain.

Regulators in the UK and Europe have signalled tighter oversight for providers of advanced AI systems. The Mythos case is likely to feed into ongoing debates about model access, transparency and safety requirements.

The incident has also renewed attention on software hardening. Fry said teams maintaining critical systems will need to assume that automated vulnerability discovery will become faster and more accurate, whether through legitimate tools or models such as Mythos.

Security leaders now expect AI-enabled offensive tools to move into the mainstream of cybercrime. They say the balance between defenders and attackers will depend on how quickly organisations improve monitoring, identity controls and secure development practices.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business & Technology

Sound Devices unveils Astral Mini Plus wireless pack

Published

on



SOFIAH NICHOLE SALIVIO

News Editor

Sound Devices has introduced the Astral Mini Plus wireless transmitter pack as part of its Astral Wireless range.

Aimed at touring, live theatre and fixed-installation work, the device keeps the compact form factor of earlier Astral transmitters while adding longer battery life, a wider tuning range and water resistance.

Astral Mini Plus offers more than eight hours of battery life and a tuning range of 169-1525 MHz. It also carries an IP67 water-resistance rating, meaning it is designed to withstand dust and temporary immersion.

Alongside the hardware launch, Sound Devices has updated the broader Astral Wireless line with V8.30 firmware. The update adds SoundBase integration to AstralComm and introduces routing changes across the range.

According to Sound Devices, the SoundBase link is intended to give audio engineers a more direct way to monitor and adjust wireless devices during RF coordination. Functions include changing frequencies, renaming transmitters and keeping key operating information visible.

Broader range

The release expands a portfolio that Sound Devices markets to sound professionals working in film, television, live events, houses of worship and education. The company designs, assembles and supports its products from its headquarters in Reedsburg, Wisconsin, and offices in Madison, Wisconsin, and Rickmansworth, UK.

The new transmitter arrives as wireless audio suppliers continue to adapt products to shifting spectrum conditions and varied venue requirements. In that context, tuning flexibility and software control have become more prominent selling points for manufacturers serving touring crews, theatre operators and systems integrators.

Sound Devices said the new model was designed to improve usability and shorten setup times. It said the updated firmware is intended to simplify operation across the Astral range by giving engineers more flexible routing options.

Matt Anderson, Chief Executive Officer at Sound Devices, commented on the launch and the software update.

“Astral Wireless is the most full-featured wireless toolkit on the market, designed to meet the ever-changing needs of a rapidly evolving RF landscape,” said Matt Anderson, Chief Executive Officer at Sound Devices.

“The launch of Astral Mini Plus, along with continued firmware development and deeper software integrations, reflects our commitment to this constant evolution and our desire to provide high-quality solutions that reflect the day-to-day realities of the most demanding RF professionals,” Anderson said.

The launch reflects a wider trend in professional audio towards combining hardware improvements with deeper software integration.

As productions become more complex and spectrum management challenges increase, manufacturers are placing greater emphasis on tools that simplify wireless coordination and device monitoring. The addition of SoundBase integration is expected to appeal to engineers managing large-scale deployments where visibility and control are critical. Extended battery life and expanded tuning capabilities may also help reduce operational interruptions in demanding live and broadcast environments.

With the latest hardware and firmware updates, Sound Devices is continuing to position Astral Wireless as a comprehensive platform for professional RF applications.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business & Technology

US fast food chain set to open its first UK restaurant

Published

on



Louisiana-born chicken brand Raising Cane’s is setting up shop on Coventry Street in the heart of London, between Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square.

Although no official opening date has been announced, branded hoardings have now appeared at the site, signalling that the long-awaited launch is edging closer.

The chain, loved by celebrities including Snoop Dogg, Post Malone and Halle Berry, opened its first store in 1996, and as it approaches 30 years in business, is coming to the UK for the first time.

US fast food chain Raising Cane’s set to open its first UK restaurant

The chain has already developed a UK-focused menu featuring both take-out and dine-in meal options, as well as customisable chicken finger combos.

Unlike many competitors, Raising Cane’s keeps its menu simple, offering chicken fingers, crinkle-cut fries, coleslaw, Texas toast, and its signature Cane’s Sauce.

The sauce, described by fans as “next level,” is a particular point of excitement among British diners, who have shared their enthusiasm online.

One food lover wrote: “Omg I absolutely love Raising Cane’s.”

Another said: “Had this in Vegas.

“It was so good.

“Definitely on a par with Slim Chickens imo.”

A third added: “The sauce is next level.

“I will travel just for that.”

The company is reportedly exploring additional central London locations, including Oxford Circus, Paddington, South Bank, and The Strand, as well as potential drive-thru sites across Greater London.

The London restaurant will be the starting point for the brand’s wider European rollout.

US fast food chain rivalling McDonald’s coming back to UK after 17 years

Raising Cane’s is the latest in a wave of US fast-food brands expanding into the UK market.

Recent arrivals include Popeyes, while Dave’s Hot Chicken and Chick-fil-A have also announced UK expansion plans.

Chili’s Grill & Bar is also looking to come back to the UK after more than 15 years, with hopes of eventually opening more than 100 restaurants across the country.

The chain originally arrived in Britain during the 1990s and operated restaurants in places including Cambridge, Reading and London’s Canary Wharf, but by 2009, every UK branch had closed.

Now, the company is making a fresh attempt at cracking the UK market, aiming to open a flagship restaurant within the next 12 to 18 months before it aims to roll out more sites, reports Need To Know.

Industry insiders say they believe the chain could open between 85 and 100 restaurants if successful, with potential locations including London, Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Glasgow, and Liverpool.

The Tex-Mex chain is well-known in the US for its burgers, ribs, fajitas, and margaritas.

What US restaurant or fast food chain would you most like to see come to the UK?





Source link

Continue Reading

Business & Technology

UK firms struggle to map supply chain cyber threats

Published

on


More than eight in 10 UK cyber security and third-party risk professionals say their organisation experienced at least one supply chain cyber incident in the past year, highlighting continued gaps in supplier oversight and incident response.

Risk Ledger‘s research Every Link Matters: The State of Supply Chain Security 2026 – UK Edition found 82.4% of respondents recorded at least one supply chain incident in the previous 12 months. Almost half, at 47.2%, reported two or more. The findings suggest supply chain cyber risk remains a persistent issue for organisations across sectors, despite stronger regulatory scrutiny of operational resilience and supplier dependencies.

Risk levels

The survey of 500 UK cyber security and third-party risk management professionals found 86% ranked supply chain cyber incidents among their top three concerns for 2026.

The data also shows a gap between concern and readiness. Only 6% of respondents said they could accurately map exposure across their supplier ecosystem in under four hours after a major supply chain cyber incident. Another 45% said it would take between four and 24 hours.

More than a quarter said it would take one to three business days. A further 23% said it would take more than a week and require manual outreach to suppliers.

Those delays can limit an organisation’s ability to respond when a supplier is compromised. Teams need to know which business services, systems and processes may be exposed. They also need to understand whether risk extends deeper into the supply chain.

Slow checks

Supplier due diligence remains slow. Only 38% of respondents said their organisation could complete security due diligence for a new supplier within two weeks.

Another 34.6% said the process took three weeks or more. Within that group, 12% said it took more than one month.

Risk Ledger’s analysis points to a structural weakness in many third-party risk management processes. They often remain manual and focused on bilateral assessment between one customer and one supplier. Many still rely on bespoke questionnaires and periodic reviews.

That approach can create duplicated work for suppliers. It can also leave customers relying on information that may not reflect current security controls.

Visibility gap

Visibility beyond direct suppliers remains uneven.

Some 30% of respondents said they had full visibility into the entire chain of subcontractors contributing to important business functions. Just over half, at 50.2%, said they had high visibility into all direct subcontractors of critical third parties.

A further 16% reported only partial visibility into some fourth parties of their critical suppliers. Only 3% said they had no visibility beyond direct critical third parties.

The findings come as regulators in the UK and EU put greater emphasis on operational resilience, concentration risk and the mapping of digital dependencies. This includes closer scrutiny of subcontractors and deeper-tier relationships that support critical or important services.

“Identifying systemic risks is really important. However in most cases, only industry-level associations have enough combined resources and adequate information sharing guardrails in place to efficiently identify actual systemic risks, agree actions and, with the help of regulators, influence large players in the supply chain,” said Yohann Le Grand, Senior Security & Resilience GRC Manager, Lloyds Wealth.

Network mapping

Risk Ledger sets out a model it calls Active Supply Chain Security. It is based on standardised assessments, continuous monitoring, network visibility, collective defence and faster incident response.

The survey suggests organisations are open to more collaborative approaches. Some 42% of respondents said their organisation would be very supportive of an industry-wide model in which supplier intelligence and assurance data are shared with peers. A further 50.2% said they would be somewhat supportive.

Risk Ledger also examined three groups using its platform: 26 government organisations, 25 local authorities and 30 financial institutions.

Across the government group, the platform identified 3,240 direct third parties and 5,886 additional dependencies across shared nth parties. It also identified 1,264 potential concentration risks, including 820 at third-party level.

Of those third-party concentration risks, 224 were rated critical. Risk Ledger said this means an incident at one supplier would be likely to disrupt essential services at multiple public sector organisations.

“Risk Ledger’s Network Visualisation Tool has enabled us to efficiently identify critical risks across our supply chain, helping us address potential concentration risks before they escalate,” said Chris Phillips, Third-Party Compliance and Assurance Lead, Home Office Cyber Security (HOCS) | Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC).

Sector exposure

The local authority group had 1,004 direct third parties and 7,659 additional dependencies across shared nth parties. Risk Ledger identified 1,240 potential concentration risks, including 364 at third-party level. Of those, 99 were rated critical.

The financial services group had 2,780 direct third parties and 6,529 additional dependencies. The platform identified 1,322 potential concentration risks, including 727 at third-party level. Of those, 288 were rated critical.

The analysis also found control weaknesses among some critical concentration risks. In the financial services group, 120 suppliers classified as critical third-party concentration risks did not have Cyber Essentials certification. Two were not using Multi-Factor Authentication to secure remote access to their network or cloud environments. Ten did not regularly test or rehearse Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery plans.

“A big challenge with third-party risk management comes down to how corporations and other organisations tackle peer-to-peer communication from within their respective siloes. We (as customers of common suppliers) need to get better at working with each other and trusting what our peers are doing. Using feedback as a form of intelligence about shared interests would allow companies to focus more time on fixing the things we really care about,” said Jay Vinda, Global CISO and Cyber Risk Engineering Lead, Mosaic Insurance.

Read full report here.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending