Security | Threat Detection | Cyberattacks | DevSecOps | Compliance

Have you ever installed a driver in your Windows OS from a third-party vendor and faced strange WHQL (Windows Hardware Quality Labs) errors? If the driver isn’t WHQL certified, you may encounter errors like “This app can’t run on your PC.” In the worst-case scenario, you might experience the Blue Screen of Death (BSOD), causing system crashes and displaying only a blue screen.

84% of board directors acknowledge cyber risk as a business risk, according to Gartner’s 2024 Board of Directors Survey (subscription required). Yet, many CISOs still find it difficult to secure enough support and resources to drive cybersecurity initiatives forward. What CISOs need most to obtain sufficient backing from the board are tools that convey cybersecurity issues effectively.

The concept of responsible disclosure is a simple one. If you find a vulnerability, you let the affected organization or software vendor know before making the information public. This gives them time to patch the vulnerability before it can be exploited. It also helps maintain trust and fosters a collaborative environment between security researchers and companies. As a cybersecurity vendor, do we want our researchers to be credited when they discover vulnerabilities? Of course.

A risk register is a GRC tool used by teams to identify, assess, and manage various risks within an organization. It acts as a centralized repository and looks at the impact and probability of a risk to prioritize its management. In cyber security, a risk register helps maintain compliance with various standards like the ISO 27001 Information Security Management System (ISMS), NIST SP800-30 Guide for Conducting Risk Assessments, or the new European NIS 2 directive.

The cybersecurity community is facing a seismic shift. MITRE’s announcement that its contract to operate the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) program will expire on April 16, 2025, without a clear renewal plan, has sent shockwaves through the industry. This development threatens to dismantle a cornerstone of global cybersecurity coordination.

The EU AI Act introduced the first comprehensive, harmonized regulatory framework for managing AI systems ethically and responsibly. Before the Act, the closest we had to such robust guidelines was ISO 42001, which has a similar overarching goal. ‍ If you’ve already implemented ISO 42001, you might have a head start in achieving EU AI Act compliance. In this guide, we explain why this is the case by covering: ‍

In 2025, AI is further transforming how software is built—accelerating code generation, testing, and deployment. But while it boosts speed and productivity, AI-driven development introduces new risks that developers and security teams can’t afford to ignore. To secure this next-gen development environment, organizations must understand the evolving threat landscape and adopt smarter, more integrated security strategies.

Threat actors don’t just try to gain access to an organization by targeting a single area of their environment. In today’s complex, connected IT environments, threat actors are utilizing multiple techniques, maneuvering through various parts of an organization’s attack surface, and launching sophisticated attacks across multiple components of the IT environment – from identity to endpoint to the cloud and beyond.

In today's cybersecurity landscape, organizations face an ever-present and often underestimated threat: human risk. Despite significant advancements in technological defenses, human error remains a leading cause of data breaches and security incidents. Multiple industry studies and research reports consistently show that between 70% and 90% of data breaches involve some form of human related cause - whether through social engineering, errors or misuse.

Researchers at Hoxhunt have found that AI agents can now outperform humans at creating convincing phishing campaigns. The researchers state that in 2023, AI-powered phishing was 31% less effective than humans. In November 2024, it was 10% less effective than humans. Then in March 2025, the AI was 24% more effective than humans.