The cybersecurity field faces a new turning point. "Claude Mythos," a security-specialized artificial intelligence (AI) model, is independently discovering previously undetected vulnerabilities and even writing code that can be used for actual attacks. AI has progressed beyond assisting human judgment to autonomously detecting vulnerabilities and designing attack pathways. AI has emerged as a new hacker, not merely a tool for problem-solving.
This shift is significant in terms of technological progress, but it simultaneously raises serious concerns. The ability to discover vulnerabilities will contribute to raising security levels, but conversely it will enable automated attacks. This is not merely a technical issue but will pose a fundamental threat to national security and industry. In particular, when AI-based attacks target critical national infrastructure such as financial systems, communication networks, and energy facilities, the ripple effect grows even larger. Accordingly, major countries are reviewing their response systems for AI security risks, and relevant ministries and industry sectors in Korea have also begun discussing response measures.
Another concern is the possibility that advanced AI security technology will be concentrated in specific countries or companies. As technological dependence deepens, a nation's security capabilities inevitably come under the influence of external conditions. To secure autonomy and safety in the digital environment, security capabilities must be strategically managed in the following ways. Technological competitiveness is not simply an industrial matter but one directly linked to national security.
First, a transition to a security architecture that assumes the possibility of breach is needed. Existing security systems focused on blocking external intrusions. However, AI-based attacks can circumvent internal access privileges or mimic legitimate activities. Under the assumption that intrusion has already occurred, system access privileges must be minimized and information assets must be separated to prevent damage. This approach is effective in cases where vulnerabilities in individual systems lead to threats across the entire network.
Second, automated defense systems are needed to respond to AI-driven attacks. Because AI-based attacks can probe vulnerabilities and carry out attacks within a very short time, passive response methods are not sufficient. Security systems must also be designed to detect and respond to anomalies in real time. In particular, an integrated security architecture in which data analysis, security policies, and response procedures operate as a single system is essential.
Third, an integrated security policy at the national level must be established. Scattered regulations need to be consolidated through an "AI Framework Act" or special legislation, and a certification system should be put in place to ensure safety from the design stage of AI systems. Furthermore, the institutional foundation for promoting vulnerability discovery and remediation activities must be expanded, and Korea should actively participate in international information-sharing frameworks. Since AI technology operates across borders, responses must also take place through cooperation.
AI is an important technology that improves human life, but it also creates risks. The faster technology advances, the more complex the risks become. Establishing institutions and policies suited to the new technological environment is no longer a matter of choice. What is needed is not regulation to control technology, but an institutional foundation for the safe operation of technology. This is because, in an era when AI designs attacks on its own, clinging to past security methods will make it difficult to respond to new risks.
AI has presented humanity with brilliant innovation, but it has simultaneously placed a destructive and stealthy weapon in our hands. In the era of AI transformation (AX), in which AI becomes a hacker, this is the golden time to rebuild a security framework worthy of the evolving intelligent threats.
