In terms of cybersecurity, agentic artificial intelligence is emerging as a transformative force that is fundamentally transforming the way digital threats are perceived and handled. It is important to note that, unlike conventional artificial intelligence systems that typically operate within predefined parameters, agentic AI systems can make autonomous decisions by interacting dynamically with digital tools, complex environments, other AI agents, and even sensitive data sets.
There is a new paradigm emerging in which AI is not only supporting decision-making but also initiating and executing actions independently in pursuit of achieving its objective in this shift. As the evolution of cybersecurity brings with it significant opportunities for innovation, such as automated threat detection, intelligent incident response, and adaptive defence strategies, it also poses some of the most challenging challenges.
As much as agentic AI is powerful for defenders, the same capabilities can be exploited by adversaries as well.
If autonomous agents are compromised or misaligned with their targets, they can act at scale in a very fast and unpredictable manner, making traditional defence mechanisms inadequate. As organisations increasingly implement agentic AI into their operations, enterprises must adopt a dual-security posture.
They need to take advantage of the strengths of agentic AI to enhance their security frameworks, but also prepare for the threats posed by it.
There is a need to strategically rethink cybersecurity principles as they relate to robust oversight, alignment protocols, and adaptive resilience mechanisms to ensure that the autonomy of AI agents is paired with the sophistication of controls that go with it. Providing security for agentic systems has become more than just a technical requirement in this new era of AI-driven autonomy.
It is a strategic imperative as well.
In the development lifecycle of Agentic AI, several interdependent phases are required to ensure that the system is not only intelligent and autonomous but also aligned with organisational goals and operational needs. Using this structured progression, agents can be made more effective, reliable, and ethically sound across a wide variety of use cases.
The first critical phase in any software development process is called Problem Definition and Requirement Analysis. This lays the foundation for all subsequent efforts in software development.
In this phase, organisations need to be able to articulate a clear and strategic understanding of the problem space that the artificial intelligence agent will be used to solve.
As well as setting clear business objectives, defining the specific tasks that the agent is required to perform, and assessing operational constraints like infrastructure availability, regulatory obligations, and ethical obligations, it is imperative for organisations to define clear business objectives.
As a result of a thorough requirements analysis, the system design is streamlined, scope creep is minimised, and costly revisions can be avoided during the later stages of the deployment.
Additionally, this phase helps stakeholders align the AI agent's technical capabilities with real-world needs, enabling it to deliver measurable results. It is arguably one of the most crucial components of the lifecycle to begin with the Data Collection and Preparation phase, which is arguably the most vital.
A system's intelligence is directly affected by the quality and comprehensiveness of the data it is trained on, regardless of which type of agentic AI it is.
It has utilised a variety of internal and trusted external sources to collect relevant datasets for this stage. These datasets are meticulously cleaned, indexed, and transformed in order to ensure that they are consistent and usable.
As a further measure of model robustness, advanced preprocessing techniques are employed, such as augmentation, normalisation, and class balancing to reduce bias, es and mitigate model failures.
In order for an AI agent to function effectively across a variety of circumstances and edge cases, a high-quality, representative dataset needs to be created as soon as possible.
These three phases together make up the backbone of the development of an agentic AI system, ensuring that it is based on real business needs and is backed up by data that is dependable, ethical, and actionable. Organisations that invest in thorough upfront analysis and meticulous data preparation have a significantly greater chance of deploying agentic AI solutions that are scalable, secure, and aligned with long-term strategic goals, when compared to those organisations that spend less.
It is important to note that the risks that a systemic AI system poses are more than technical failures; they are deeply systemic in nature. Agentic AI is not a passive system that executes rules; it is an active system that makes decisions, takes action and adapts as it learns from its mistakes. Although dynamic autonomy is powerful, it also introduces a degree of complexity and unpredictability, which makes failures harder to detect until significant damage has been sustained.
The agentic AI systems differ from traditional software systems in the sense that they operate independently and can evolve their behaviour over time as they become more and more complex. OWASP's Top Ten for LLM Applications (2025) highlights how agents can be manipulated into misusing tools or storing deceptive information that can be detrimental to the users' security. If not rigorously monitored, this very feature can turn out to be a source of danger.
It is possible that corrupted data penetrates a person's memory in such situations, so that future decisions will be influenced by falsehoods. In time, these errors may compound, leading to cascading hallucinations in which the system repeatedly generates credible but inaccurate outputs, reinforcing and validating each other, making it increasingly challenging for the deception to be detected.
Furthermore, agentic systems are also susceptible to more traditional forms of exploitation, such as privilege escalation, in which an agent may impersonate a user or gain access to restricted functions without permission. As far as the extreme scenarios go, agents may even override their constraints by intentionally or unintentionally pursuing goals that do not align with the user's or organisation's goals. Taking advantage of deceptive behaviours is a challenging task, not only ethically but also operationally.
Additionally, resource exhaustion is another pressing concern.
Agents can be overloaded by excessive queues of tasks, which can exhaust memory, computing bandwidth, or third-party API quotas, whether through accident or malicious attacks. When these problems occur, not only do they degrade performance, but they also can result in critical system failures, particularly when they arise in a real-time environment.
Moreover, the situation is even worse when agents are deployed on lightweight frameworks, such as lightweight or experimental multi-agent control platforms (MCPs), which may not have the essential features like logging, user authentication, or third-party validation mechanisms, as the situation can be even worse.
When security teams are faced with such a situation, tracking decision paths or identifying the root cause of failures becomes increasingly difficult or impossible, leaving them blind to their own internal behaviour as well as external threats.
A systemic vulnerability in agentic artificial intelligence must be considered a core design consideration rather than a peripheral concern, as it continues to integrate into high-stakes environments.
It is essential, not only for safety to be ensured, but also to build the long-term trust needed to enable enterprise adoption, that agents act in a transparent, traceable, and ethical manner. Several core functions give agentic AI systems the agency that enables them to make autonomous decisions, behave adaptively, and pursue long-term goals. These functions are the foundation of their agency. The essence of agentic intelligence is the autonomy of agents, which means that they operate without being constantly overseen by humans.
They perceive their environment with data streams or sensors, evaluate contextual factors, and execute actions that are in keeping with the predefined objectives of these systems.
There are a number of examples in which autonomous warehouse robots adjust their path in real time without requiring human input, demonstrating both situational awareness and self-regulation. The agentic AI system differs from reactive AI systems, which are designed to respond to isolated prompts, since they are designed to pursue complex, sometimes long-term goals without the need for human intervention.
As a result of explicit or non-explicit instructions or reward systems, these agents can break down high-level tasks, such as organising a travel itinerary, into actionable subgoals that are dynamically adjusted according to the new information available. In order for the agent to formulate step-by-step strategies, planner-executor architectures and techniques such as chain-of-thought prompting or ReAct are used by the agent to formulate strategies.
In order to optimise outcomes, these plans may use graph-based search algorithms or simulate multiple future scenarios to achieve optimal results. Moreover, reasoning further enhances a user's ability to assess alternatives, weigh tradeoffs, and apply logical inferences to them. Large language models are also used as reasoning engines, allowing tasks to be broken down and multiple-step problem-solving to be supported.
The final feature of memory is the ability to provide continuity.
Using previous interactions, results, and context-often through vector databases-agents can refine their behavior over time by learning from their previous experiences and avoiding unnecessary or unnecessary actions.
An agentic AI system must be secured more thoroughly than incremental changes to existing security protocols. Rather, it requires a complete rethink of its operational and governance models. A system capable of autonomous decision-making and adaptive behaviour must be treated as an enterprise entity of its own to be considered in a competitive market.
There is a need for rigorous scrutiny, continuous validation, and enforceable safeguards in place throughout the lifecycle of any influential digital actor, including AI agents. In order to achieve a robust security posture, it is essential to control non-human identities. As part of this process, strong authentication mechanisms must be implemented, along with behavioural profiling and anomaly detection, to identify and neutralise attempts to impersonate or spoof before damage occurs.
As a concept, identity cannot stay static in dynamic systems, since it must change according to the behaviour and role of the agent in the environment. The importance of securing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems at the source cannot be overstated. As part of this strategy, organisations need to enforce rigorous access policies over knowledge repositories, examine embedding spaces for adversarial interference, and continually evaluate the effectiveness of similarity matching methods to avoid data leaks or model manipulations that are not intended.
The use of automated red teaming is essential to identifying emerging threats, not just before deployment, but constantly in order to mitigate them. It involves adversarial testing and stress simulations that are designed to expose behavioural anomalies, misalignments with the intended goals, and configuration weaknesses in real-time. Further, it is imperative that comprehensive governance frameworks be established in order to ensure the success of generative and agentic AI.
As a part of this process, the agent behaviour must be codified in enforceable policies, runtime oversight must be enabled, and detailed, tamper-evident logs must be maintained for auditing and tracking lifecycles. The shift towards agentic AI is more than just a technological evolution. The shift represents a profound change in the way decisions are made, delegated, and monitored in the future.
A rapid adoption of these systems often exceeds the ability of traditional security infrastructures to adapt in a way that is not fully understood by them.
Without meaningful oversight, clearly defined responsibilities, and strict controls, AI agents could inadvertently or maliciously exacerbate risk, rather than delivering what they promise.
In response to these trends, organisations need to ensure that agents operate within well-defined boundaries, under continuous observation, and aligned with organisational intent, as well as being held to the same standards as human decision-makers.
There are enormous benefits associated with agentic AI, but there are also huge risks associated with it.
Moreover, these systems should not just be intelligent; they should also be trustworthy, transparent, and their rules should be as precise and robust as those they help enforce to be truly transformative.
.jpg "Fake AI Tools Are Being Used to Spread Dangerous Malware")
.jpg)
