For all the possibilities AI gives us, there is always a chance of the technology malfunctioning or becoming compromised. In the event of an AI system crisis, new research from ISACA has found that the majority of organisations surveyed couldn’t explain how quickly they could stop an AI system emergency, or even report on what caused the issue.
According to ISACA’s report, 59% of digital trust professionals didn’t understand how quickly their organisation could interrupt and halt an AI system during a security incident. Just 21% reported that they could meaningfully step in in half an hour. The indicates a landscape where corrupted AI systems can continue to operate unchecked, leading to a risk of irreversible damage.
Ali Sarrafi, CEO & Founder of Kovant, an autonomous enterprise platform, said, “ISACA’s findings point to a major structural issue in the way that organisations are deploying AI. Systems are being embedded into critical workflows without the governance layer needed to supervise and audit their actions. If a business cannot quickly halt an AI system, explain its behaviour, or even identify who is to be held accountable, the business is not in control of that system.”
AI failures and risks
In all, only 42% of respondents expressed any confidence in their organisation being able to analyse and clarify serious AI incidents, thus leading to possible operational failures and security risks. Moreover, without explaining these incidents to regulators and leadership, businesses may face legal penalties and public backlash.
Proper analysis is needed to learn from mistakes. Without a clear understanding, the likelihood of repeated incidents only increases. It’s important is to manage AI responsibly, with effective AI governance, yet ISACA’s findings indicate this is often missing.
Accountability is another fuzzy area with 20% reporting that they do not know who would be responsible if an AI system caused damage. Just 38% identified the Board or an Executive as ultimately responsible.
Sarrafi noted that slowing down AI adoption is not the answer; instead, rethinking how it is managed is key. “AI systems need to sit in a structured management layer that treats them as digital employees, with clear ownership, defined escalation paths, and the ability to be paused or overridden instantly when risk thresholds are crossed. The way, agents stop being mysterious bots and become systems you can inspect and trust. As AI becomes more deeply embedded in core business functions, governance cannot be an afterthought. It has to be built into the architecture from day one, with visibility and control designed in at every level. The organisations that get this right will not reduce risk, they will be the ones that can confidently scale AI in the business.”
There is some reassurance, however, with 40% of respondents saying humans approve almost all AI actions before being deployed, and a further 26% evaluate AI outcomes. That being said, without…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
