The AI Vs. Humans Debate Is The Wrong Question In Cybersecurity: CISO

Finding the right balance between AI and humans—not choosing between them—will be critical to cybersecurity and the channel going forward, Noma Security CISO Diana Kelley tells CRN’s Security or Else! podcast.

Framing the future of cybersecurity as a choice between AI and humans misses the point, according to Noma Security’s Diana Kelley.

In an interview for the second episode of Security or Else!—a new CRN video series hosted by senior editor Kyle Alspach—Kelley discussed the importance of finding the right balance between AI and humans.

[Related: ThreatLocker CEO: ‘Fighting AI With AI’ Is Not A Winning Security Strategy]

Rather than choosing between AI- or human-driven security, striking the right balance will be so critical to cybersecurity and the channel going forward, according to Kelley, CISO of AI security startup Noma Security and formerly of Microsoft and Protect AI (acquired by Palo Alto Networks).

This is especially the case as attackers are already using AI to automate attacks, find vulnerabilities and lower the technical barrier to entry—requiring defenders to adopt the same tools while keeping humans involved in the decisions that matter most, Kelley said.

“If the attackers have these tools, we the defenders need to use these tools,” Kelley said in the interview for Security or Else!

At the same time, the term “artificial intelligence” can also create a misleading impression that models are somehow becoming more intelligent independently of humans, Kelley said.

In reality, while the models are becoming better trained, this is largely through the work of people and the use of human-generated data.

“The models are getting better trained. And most of the time, a lot of that training is coming from humans,” Kelley said. “What are they getting trained on? Data. Data that was created by humans.”