Blog

Analysis on enterprise AI governance, inline policy enforcement, agentic AI security, and regulatory compliance.

A Lone Attacker Crossed an AWS Estate in 72 Hours With AI as the Force Multiplier

On July 8, 2026 Sygnia disclosed an intrusion in which a single, non-elite threat actor used AI as a force multiplier to breach a global enterprise's AWS environment and spread across applications, CI/CD pipelines, repositories, databases, and runtime services in roughly 72 hours. No zero-day. No novel malware. Familiar techniques executed at machine speed across more surfaces than the defenders could contain. I want to focus on the tempo argument and what it does to any control that operates after the traffic has already landed.

Problem-Awareai-securitycybersecurityinline-enforcementagentic-aicloud-securityllm-security
Read post →

The EU Action Plan on Cybersecurity and AI: Pre-Market Evaluation, Structured Access, and What Enterprises Must Evidence

On July 7, 2026 the European Commission presented its Action Plan on Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence: pre-market evaluation of advanced models, an EU third-party evaluation capacity supporting the AI Office, an ENISA and JRC secure testing platform, a structured-access blueprint for advanced AI capabilities, and tighter alignment with NIS2 and the Cyber Resilience Act. I read the plan as a directional signal about evidence. This walks each pillar and maps it to the authorization and audit records an enterprise has to be able to produce on demand.

Compliance & Regulationeu-ai-actai-governanceai-complianceregulationcybersecurityaudit
Read post →

Open Source AI Gateway: What It Covers and Where the Gap Is

Open source AI gateways solved the operational problem of talking to many model providers through one interface: unified APIs, routing, rate limiting, caching, key management, and observability. They are strong at the operational layer and mostly leave the control layer, identity-bound authorization, prompt classification, and a tamper-evident per-decision audit record, as a build-it-yourself exercise. This walks through what the open source category covers, where the regulated-deployment gap sits, and how to evaluate the difference.

AI Security Solutionsai-gatewayai-securityinline-enforcementarchitecturellm-security
Read post →

AI Gateway vs AI Firewall: The Architectural Difference

AI firewall and AI gateway get used as synonyms, and they describe different postures. A firewall filters content against known-bad patterns: prompt-injection signatures, jailbreak strings, disallowed topics. A gateway sits in the request path and decides, per identity and per policy, whether a call is permitted, then records it. This walks the architectural distinction, where each fits, and why a regulated deployment needs the identity and audit properties a pattern filter does not provide.

AI Security Solutionsai-gatewayai-securityinline-enforcementllm-securityarchitecture
Read post →

AI Gateway for Regulated Industries: The Control Requirements

A general AI gateway routes traffic and manages keys. A regulated deployment needs more from the same layer: identity bound to every request, prompt-level classification of PHI, NPI, and PII, data-residency control over which endpoints a prompt may reach, a fail-closed posture, and a per-decision audit record that survives a regulator's questions. This walks through the control requirements and maps them to healthcare, finance, government, and legal regimes.

AI Security Solutionsai-gatewayai-securityinline-enforcementcompliancearchitecture
Read post →

Third-Party AI Risk Management: The Embedded-Model Problem

The hardest third-party AI risk to manage is the AI you did not know a vendor was running. A SaaS tool summarizes your tickets with an LLM, a quality vendor scores your files with a model, and your data leaves for an endpoint you never approved. This walks the third-party AI risk lifecycle, from discovery through offboarding, centered on embedded and subprocessor AI, model-provider concentration, and the due-care obligation a SOC 2 report does not discharge.

Compliance & Regulationai-governanceai-compliancecomplianceregulationaudit
Read post →

GDPR AI Compliance Requirements for LLM Deployments

GDPR predates the LLM era, but its obligations attach the moment personal data reaches a prompt. Lawful basis, purpose limitation, data minimization, special-category handling, automated-decision rights, records of processing, and cross-border transfer rules all apply to AI request traffic. This maps each requirement to the control that satisfies it at the AI request boundary, and shows why prompt content is the layer most GDPR programs currently cannot see.

Compliance & Regulationgdprai-complianceregulationcomplianceai-governance
Read post →

EU AI Act Compliance Requirements: The 2026 Timeline After the Omnibus

The Digital Omnibus moved the EU AI Act's standalone high-risk obligations to December 2, 2027, but the August 2, 2026 date did not empty out. Article 50 transparency duties still apply then, the penalty framework is live, and the high-risk requirements themselves, risk management and lifetime event logging, still exist on a later clock. This lays out what applies when, by role, and the record-keeping obligation that runs underneath most of it.

Compliance & Regulationeu-ai-actai-complianceregulationcomplianceai-governance
Read post →

Colorado AI Act Compliance: What SB 26-189 Requires of Deployers

On May 14, 2026 Colorado's governor signed SB 26-189, which repeals and replaces the original Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) and takes effect January 1, 2027. The new law narrows the target to automated decision-making technology that materially influences a consequential decision, and shifts obligations toward adverse-outcome explanations, correction and human-review rights, and a three-year record retention duty. This walks through what deployers must produce and where the evidence comes from.

Compliance & Regulationai-complianceregulationai-governancecomplianceaudit
Read post →

An AI Risk Assessment Template That Survives a Regulatory Review

Most AI risk assessment templates are a spreadsheet of likelihood-times-impact scores that no regulator would accept as evidence. This walks through the fields an assessment actually needs, mapped to NIST AI RMF MAP and MEASURE and to EU AI Act obligations, and shows why the row a template skips most often is where the AI request produces an identity-bound record of what happened at inference.

Compliance & Regulationai-governanceai-compliancenist-ai-rmfeu-ai-actcompliance
Read post →

JadePuffer, Agentic Ransomware, and What It Changes About AI Egress

On July 1, 2026 Sysdig disclosed JadePuffer, the first documented ransomware operation run end to end by an LLM agent: initial access through a Langflow RCE and a Nacos auth bypass, then autonomous recon, credential theft, lateral movement, and database extortion, with the agent self-correcting a failed subprocess call in 31 seconds with no human in the loop. The one control that sits inside an AI gateway's boundary is the outbound model traffic the agent depends on to think.

Problem-Awareagentic-aiai-securitycybersecurityllm-securityinline-enforcement
Read post →

Langflow CVE-2026-55255: Multi-Tenant Secret Isolation and AI Provider Keys

On July 8, 2026 Help Net Security reported active exploitation of CVE-2026-55255, a CVSS 9.9 cross-tenant IDOR in Langflow that lets one tenant read another tenant's embedded secrets: LLM provider keys, cloud credentials, database passwords. CISA set a July 10 federal mitigation deadline. The architectural lesson is about where AI orchestration tools keep long-lived provider keys, and why a stateless gateway that holds none of them gives a secret-harvest bug far less to reach.

Platform & Architectureai-securityllm-securitycybersecurityai-gatewayarchitecture
Read post →