Security | Threat Detection | Cyberattacks | DevSecOps | Compliance

Somewhere in the last few months, the math of application security quietly broke. Anthropic’s Claude Mythos Preview didn’t just analyze code, it found a 27-year-old vulnerability in OpenBSD, a 16-year-old bug in FFmpeg, and a 17-year-old remote code execution flaw in FreeBSD, entirely on its own. Then it went further: it built working exploits for them. No human guidance. No months of manual research. And by Anthropic’s own account, this is only a preview of what’s coming.

Organizations pushed toward Intune are hitting the same wall regardless of industry or size. Intune doesn't manage servers, can't do bare metal imaging, still lacks the OU-style hierarchy and delegation Group Policy admins are used to, and covers a fraction of the settings Group Policy has supported for 20 years, though that gap has narrowed. That's why so many IT teams are stuck running Group Policy and Intune side by side years past their planned cutover.

The UK's compliance environment is shifting fast as organisations move to the cloud and accelerate digital transformation. This guide breaks down the core cybersecurity laws and regulations UK organisations need to know, from data protection statutes to sector-specific frameworks, and what recent government data reveals about the threat landscape driving them.

Accelerating security solutions for small businesses‍ Tagore offers strategic services to small businesses. A partnership that can scale‍ Tagore prioritized finding a managed compliance partner with an established product, dedicated support team, and rapid release rate. Standing out from competitors‍ Tagore's partnership with Vanta enhances its strategic focus and deepens client value, creating differentiation in a competitive market.

Twenty-two seconds. That’s the median time it now takes for one attacker to hand freshly compromised access to the next team in the chain, the group that drives toward ransomware. In 2022, that hand-off took more than eight hours. In 2025, it took twenty-two seconds. Now consider how the average security operations center (SOC) is structured to respond. An alert fires, lands in a queue, and waits for a Tier 1 analyst to triage it. It escalates to Tier 2 for investigation.

To write an AI usage policy, define its scope, list approved and prohibited tools, name the data types banned from prompts, write clear rules, align to recognized frameworks and set enforcement. A written policy is the decision layer; pairing it with technical controls is what turns those decisions into protection.

Governance, risk and compliance programs rarely fail at the design stage. The policies exist, the register exists, the assessment calendar exists, and an auditor examining the documentation finds a coherent program. The failures are operational and they share a shape, which is that a mechanism runs without ever reaching a decision. ‍ Six of those are common enough to be predictable.

Every enterprise control framework assumes the entity that requests an action and the entity that approves it are different. Multi-agent workflows quietly dissolve that assumption. Three agents each holding modest, individually reasonable permissions can compose an action none of them was authorized to take, and no single permission grant looks wrong in a review. ‍ That is the distinguishing property of multi-agent systems rather than a harder version of single-agent risk.

Organizations preparing for the EU AI Act keep asking which standard to certify against, and the honest answer is that the ones that will matter are not finished. No harmonized standard has been cited in the Official Journal, and nothing available today confers presumption of conformity with the Act's requirements for high-risk systems. ‍

Your security stack is a set of specialists, each guarding one territory. Exposed credentials don't respect the boundaries between them, and 64% of the ones found valid in 2022 were still valid four years later.