Survey Says: Public Companies Feel Exposed, Rushing to Build Protective Wall

I suppose it’s good news, in a sense, to learn that the boards and management teams of almost all public companies are suddenly panicking about their cybersecurity exposure.

Panicking in the most constructive of ways, that is, according to a survey by Glilot Capital:

There is no board or management team of a public company that isn’t demanding rapid AI adoption to improve profitability and ensure survival. Organizations feel completely exposed, as if they have no protective wall, so they are rushing to build a new one. For the cybersecurity industry, this shift will enable the creation of a new generation of giant companies.

That’s the word from Arik Kleinstein, co-founder and managing partner of Glilot, which describes itself as a cybersecurity fund. That means Glilot is investing in the development of major cybersecurity companies, which it wouldn’t be doing if it didn’t see a market demand.

And right now, the demand is all about AI:

When asked which security categories would receive funding from the new 2026 budget (with respondents able to select up to two options), nearly 80% pointed to AI-related solutions, while about 20% did not mark AI as a high priority. Specifically, 77.8% said new investments would be directed to AI-powered cybersecurity tools, and 41.3% selected AI systems for automating security tasks. Cloud data protection and identity threat detection were each chosen by 33% of respondents, while 22% prioritized exposure management and attack-surface solutions.

There is clearly some logic to this. Not only are most of the newer tools AI-driven, but many of the threats are AI-driven as well. You can hardly operate in this arena without at least giving AI the role it best fits.

But the same survey also raised the possibility that ubiquitousness of AI might be undermining the traditional consolidation model for the deployment of cybersecurity tools.

It’s an old question: Would you rather have the smallest possible number of vendors (which means you use the tools that your limited roster of vendors can supply), or would you rather just use the best product in each category regardless of where it comes from (which almost certainly means a lot more vendors)?

But more than half of those surveyed said they think the operational use of AI for defense will become the industry standard as soon as the end of 2026. It seems there’s no turning back the AI tsunami when it comes to cybersecurity, or anything else.

Is this the wisest approach?

In our view, the best option is to contract with experienced experts who deploy all tools – AI or otherwise – wisely and effectively.

AI can do a great job of detecting potential threats, and your cybersecurity consultants would be fools not to make use of these tools. At the end of the day, AI can’t understand your business, your priorities or your values. Only people can do that.

So the public companies who are suddenly rushing to build cybersecurity walls will surely be able to afford the very best tools on the market, including the latest AI-driven products. That’s an advantage for them.

I am concerned they’ll fall short of the best strategy, however, by either relying solely on the tools, or by making the mistake of thinking their existing IT department will know enough about the cyberthreats to keep on top of everything.

If owners spend all this money and build these walls of protection, only to be breached anyway because they didn’t have the human expertise in place, they’ll have a hard time explaining that one in the next quarterly report.

If you’d like to talk to the experts who know exactly how to deploy the tools to protect you, email dacarey@cybersynergies.io or call 616.600.4180.