Show Notes
Attackers aren't just using AI to steal data; they're using it to fight back while you investigate them in real time. And once an adversary is inside, why would they ever want to leave? That's the unsettling reality Tom Kellermann, VP of AI Security and Threat Research at TrendAI, lays out in this episode.
And the numbers prove it. According to a 2026 TrendAI survey of 46 financial-sector CISOs, more than 60% of respondents experienced counter-incident response, where adversaries actively disrupt live investigations. In addition, nearly 90% of these leaders reported more AI-enabled attacks year over year.
Tom joins Johnny Hand and Dustin Childs to explain why the threats that hit the banks first tend to hit everyone else next, and what defenders can do about it.
You'll learn:
Why ungoverned AI should be treated as a command-and-control (C2) channel, and how attackers use it for reconnaissance, lateral movement, and persistence
How agentic attacks work end-to-end, from jailbreaking LLMs through API attacks to dynamically spinning up C2s in minutes
What tactics are used most for bank crime, from the rise of reverse business email compromise (RBEC), deepfake "employee digital twins," and the theft of non-public market information for digital front-running
How a strategic leadership alignment can improve AI defense
Why stick around:
Tom lays out how defenders can turn AI against the attackers, and why a CISO's independent voice has never mattered more.
Episode resources:
Modern Bank Heists 2026 report
Tom Kellermann on LinkedIn
Dustin Childs on LinkedIn
Johnny Hand on LinkedIn
TrendAI on LinkedIn
About AI Security Brief
AI Security Brief is where security and technology leaders come to get ahead. Join us for real conversations on the AI trends, threats, and decisions that can’t wait.
About TrendAI™
TrendAI™ empowers organizations to lead the future of AI with proactive security designed to inspire innovation and eliminate risk. TrendAI™. AI Fearlessly.
More from AI Security Brief
Your AI initiative gets the green light. But now all the parameters and guardrails you built into your plan need to be executed. Who owns AI once it goes live? Who’s watching as AI use expands? And if the AI workflow fails, can anyone still run the process it replaced?
The “AI trust paradox” in cybersecurity goes like this: organizations invest in AI automation, then hold back from fully implementing it. Yet as attackers continue to use AI to move faster, defenders need to leverage AI to fix things as fast as it finds them.
In traditional IT, isolating a compromised endpoint can stop an attack. In operational technology (OT) environments, that same action could disrupt control of a pipeline, cause a rupture, or trigger environmental damage.
There's no silver bullet when it comes to AI security strategy, and treating one model, tool, or vendor as the answer can limit an organization’s ability to adapt.
Is your organization truly AI native, or did you just bolt AI onto existing infrastructure? Your answer could be an indicator to how much risk you’re carrying without realizing it.