By Danielle Steitz
The warnings of experts alarmed by the proliferation of AI-enabled cyber threats reached a new pitch this month, already coined “Black October” by cybersecurity professionals and drawing parallels to March of 2020. The discovery of critical vulnerabilities in the programming language PHP, which underpins more than 70% of the Internet’s webpages, was the banner event that drew attention to the slew of vulnerabilities and exploits that have recently been exposed by AI tools. Earlier in the month, the Japanese government declared a “state of emergency in cyberspace” after a surge of cyberattacks targeted government websites, banks, and transit organizations, while South Korea experienced a series of cyberattacks against financial institutions that CrowdStrike assessed were launched by a single individual utilizing agentic AI tools. As 404Media’s Jason Koebler puts it, “AI is proving something that we have always known: much of the software that runs the internet, our devices, our accounts, and our lives is vulnerable,” and the availability of AI models has “made it extremely easy to essentially brute force the internet.”
PPI Expert Analysis:
Danielle Steitz, Director of National Security Policy: In the past, the biggest barriers to a “brute force” or “try every doorknob” approach to hacking have been technical prowess (knowing enough to understand what you’re looking at and where the doorknob even is) and time (you can only try one or a few doorknobs at a time). AI models — both top-of-the-line frontier models as well as open-source models available online — have drastically reduced the technical know-how needed to find exploits and hack systems, while also eliminating time-based limits by operating 24/7 without needing to pause for sleep or other tasks. This means that some targets that might have been previously passed over by hackers — small hospitals, local electric utilities, and other key service providers who might have once been judged to not be worth the time and effort to hack – must now accept that there is no hiding, and invest and prepare accordingly. While nobody knows the full extent to which AI might reshape cybersecurity — some experts still remain hopeful that AI’s utility in patching vulnerabilities will ultimately result in a more secure cyber architecture — one thing appears clear: building resilient systems is paramount. Individuals and organizations should assume it’s a matter of when, not if, they will be hacked, and invest in developing their ability to identify intrusions, repel the attack, mitigate damage, and resume normal operations.
By Danielle Steitz
A hotly contested election this week in Brazil has been marred by accusations of fraud and illegitimacy. Flávio Bolsonaro, the right-wing opponent to incumbent Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has fled to Florida after the Brazilian public voted to reelect Lula by a margin of roughly 5 million votes. Flávio appears to be following in the footsteps of his father, disgraced former president Jair Bolsonaro, who fled to Florida after losing to and attempting a coup against Lula in 2022, and who is currently serving a 27-year sentence under house arrest in Brazil for his crimes. Flávio and his family arrived in Miami on Wednesday despite Flávio’s passport having been confiscated by Brazilian authorities as part of a Supreme Court investigation into charges of corruption, tax evasion and money laundering. Despite this cloud of suspicion, Bolsonaro apparently entered the U.S. with President Trump’s approval, as the American president has publicly called the election “really strange” and “rigged.” Trump declined, however, to comment on Flávio’s statement, in which he declared himself the rightful leader of Brazil and called for the election results to be annulled.
PPI Expert Analysis:
Danielle Steitz, Director of National Security Policy: Trump’s domestic election denialism and degradation of faith in electoral results have gone global, with Bolsonaro as his latest right-wing ally to copy his playbook. Bolsonaro’s insistence that he is the true winner of the election flies in the face of his own party’s acceptance of the results as well as the recognition by international governments of Lula’s victory, but looks very similar to Trump’s 2020 election denials. Trump’s decision to offer refuge to a man fleeing investigation in his own country after his focus on deporting “criminal immigrants” comes across as hypocritical, but it’s not surprising in light of his administration’s reported support for the Bolsonaro family. As my colleague Ed Gresser noted this week, all of this takes place against the backdrop of a pessimistic global environment for electoral democracies.
By Danielle Steitz
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has relieved yet another distinguished general officer from a leadership post, this time removing LTG Brett Sylvia, a 32-year Army veteran, from his position as director of the Joint Staff’s Directorate for Strategy, Plans, and Policy (J5). An unnamed senior Pentagon official provided a statement to a select group of news outlets alleging that LTG Sylvia had been fired for leaking classified information to reporters concerning the war with Iran, Ukraine, and other matters, and that an investigation had been referred to the Justice Department. The Joint Staff initially put out a statement wishing LTG Sylvia and his family well as they transitioned into their next chapter, only to later retract it, claiming that “the statement did not appropriately reflect the full circumstances” and declining to comment further “out of respect for the servicemember and the ongoing personnel process.”
PPI Expert Analysis:
Danielle Steitz, Director of National Security Policy: First and foremost, leaking classified information is a criminal activity, and as a former Joint Staff officer, I do not take the obligation to safeguard classified information lightly in the slightest. With that said, it is impossible to assess this latest firing without acknowledging a clear pattern of behavior from Pete Hegseth whereby allegations of leaking have been made against multiple officials with no substantiating evidence ever presented. In fact, Hegseth’s former special advisor Dan Caldwell, who was fired last year for allegedly leaking information, has since been rehired into the administration as a senior advisor to the Director of National Intelligence — certainly not a position given to an adjudicated leaker. It is also critical to note that, given LTG JP McGee’s accelerated retirement last fall, this is the second J5 that has been pushed out in the past year. Given that the position of the J5 is essentially the Joint Staff counterpart to Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby, as well as Hegseth’s clear preference for surrounding himself with “yes men”, it seems possible that personality clashes or diverging perspectives between Sylvia and Hegseth or Colby are now being twisted into more severe allegations to justify Sylvia’s removal. I anticipate the congressional oversight committees’ continued focus on the personnel moves and rationales offered by the Hegseth Pentagon, with particular scrutiny on what evidence substantiates these allegations of criminal behavior by a decorated senior officer.
“Zelensky Stood Up to Trump and Came Out Ahead—For Now” by Tamar Jacoby in Washington Monthly
Tamar Jacoby, director of PPI’s New Ukraine project, has just published her analysis on who won the latest round of escalating tensions between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the Donald Trump-led United States. Her verdict? Zelensky has more shrewdly judged both the political moment and weathered drastic U.S. restrictions on Starshield, U.S. intelligence sharing, and Patriot interceptors to emerge with world opinion firmly on his side.
