Asymmetric Security operates on the assumption that AGI is inevitable. This 'AGI-pilled' worldview shapes their strategy to completely rethink cyber defense, preparing for a world with a virtually unlimited supply of intelligent labor, rather than just automating current tasks.
Related Insights
Large cybersecurity incumbents are not fully embracing an AGI-centric strategy for forensics. Their focus on existing product revenue, combined with a cultural skepticism among security professionals about AI's true capabilities, means they are undervaluing the paradigm shift. This inertia provides a crucial opening for 'AGI-pilled' startups.
The rapid evolution of AI makes reactive security obsolete. The new approach involves testing models in high-fidelity simulated environments to observe emergent behaviors from the outside. This allows mapping attack surfaces even without fully understanding the model's internal mechanics.
The same AI technology amplifying cyber threats can also generate highly secure, formally verified code. This presents a historic opportunity for a society-wide effort to replace vulnerable legacy software in critical infrastructure, leading to a durable reduction in cyber risk. The main challenge is creating the motivation for this massive undertaking.
The cybersecurity landscape is now a direct competition between automated AI systems. Attackers use AI to scale personalized attacks, while defenders must deploy their own AI stacks that leverage internal data access to monitor, self-attack, and patch vulnerabilities in real-time.
The current cyber defense model is reactive, using triage for endless alerts. Asymmetric Security's AGI-premised strategy is to shift this paradigm to proactive, continuous digital forensics. AI agents provide the 'infinite intelligent labor' needed to conduct deep investigations constantly, not just after a breach is suspected.
The long-term trajectory for AI in cybersecurity might heavily favor defenders. If AI-powered vulnerability scanners become powerful enough to be integrated into coding environments, they could prevent insecure code from ever being deployed, creating a "defense-dominant" world.
While AI gives attackers scale, defenders possess a fundamental advantage: direct access to internal systems like AWS logs and network traffic. A defending AI stack can work with ground-truth data, whereas an attacking AI must infer a system's state from external signals, giving the defender the upper hand.
The skills for digital forensics (detecting intrusions) are distinct from offensive hacking (creating intrusions). This separation means that focusing AI development on forensics offers a rare opportunity to 'differentially accelerate' defensive capabilities. We can build powerful defensive tools without proportionally improving offensive ones, creating a strategic advantage for cybersecurity.
Security's focus shifted from physical (bodyguards) to digital (cybersecurity) with the internet. As AI agents become primary economic actors, security must undergo a similar fundamental reinvention. The core business value may be the same (like Blockbuster vs. Netflix), but the security architecture must be rebuilt from first principles.
The old security adage was to be better than your neighbor. AI attackers, however, will be numerous and automated, meaning companies can't just be slightly more secure than peers; they need robust defenses against a swarm of simultaneous threats.
