Coretelligent

Only 9% of life sciences companies have a dedicated AI ethicist. Payers are at 17%. That gap is now a governance liability, not just a staffing stat. The FDA has authorized 1,000+ AI-enabled medical devices, and CDER has reviewed 500+ AI-related drug and biologic submissions since 2016. Regulators have moved from watching to requiring. Three things biotech and life sciences leaders need to know now: → A new credibility framework exists. The FDA's January 2025 draft guidance introduces a seven-step process for assessing AI model risk in drug and biological submissions. It applies across nonclinical, clinical, postmarketing, and manufacturing phases. → GxP validation assumptions no longer hold. Conventional validation assumes deterministic software, but AI is probabilistic: it drifts, and can hallucinate. Most experts agree only an "amplified human" model (AI generates, humans verify every output) is currently workable for GxP processes. → Global alignment is accelerating. In January 2026, the FDA and EMA jointly published 10 shared principles for responsible AI use, signaling that governance expectations are converging across borders. By 2028, Gartner projects 70% of life sciences companies will have a formal AI validation framework in place. The organizations building that muscle now will move faster later, with fewer surprises at audit time. Where does your AI governance framework stand today? Full breakdown: https://buff.ly/yhymdNV

Most enterprise AI programs track what's easy to measure: deployment counts, licensing costs, uptime. What they miss is everything that happens after rollout. That's where hidden AI risk lives: shadow AI, technical debt, vendor lock-in, skills erosion, talent silos. None of it shows up on a dashboard until it becomes an incident, an audit finding, or a competitor's advantage. A few numbers worth sitting with: 🔹 80%+ of enterprises will be running GenAI in production by 2026 (Gartner) 🔹 63% of organizations have no governance policy for shadow AI (Coretelligent) 🔹 88% use AI regularly, yet few report real enterprise-wide value (McKinsey) The gap between adoption and visibility is exactly where risk compounds. Our latest breakdown covers where these blind spots form across technology, governance, talent, and strategy, plus what CIOs can do before they surface as real problems. Read the full piece: https://buff.ly/lBDJjZc #AIGovernance #ShadowAI #CIO #EnterpriseAI #TechnicalDebt

The biggest phishing threat today isn't a poorly written email. It's a perfectly written one. AI has changed phishing. Attackers now research their targets, mimic trusted colleagues, clone voices, and wait for the exact moment someone is busy, distracted, or under pressure. A message from your CFO. A text from a vendor. A voicemail from a colleague. It can all be generated, personalized, and delivered at scale. The result? Employees who would have spotted traditional phishing attempts may fall for today's AI-powered attacks. In our latest blog, we explore how AI phishing is evolving, why legacy defenses struggle to keep up, and what organizations should do to reduce risk. Key topics include: ✅ AI-generated spear phishing ✅ Voice cloning and deepfake scams ✅ Multi-channel attacks across email, SMS, and phone ✅ Modern detection and response strategies ✅ Building security awareness programs that actually work Organizations that adapt their defenses now will be better positioned to manage one of the fastest-growing cybersecurity threats. 📖 Read the blog: https://buff.ly/lFxcu0l #Cybersecurity #AIPhishing #EmailSecurity

AI is moving beyond chatbots. Agentic AI can access systems, execute workflows, and take actions autonomously, creating a new category of risk. That's the core shift behind agentic AI governance, and it's why it belongs on the board agenda, not just the IT roadmap. The exposure is already measurable. Analysts are projecting thousands of AI-related legal claims this year alone, and boards are increasingly asking a simple question security teams often can't answer fast: which agents touch regulated data, and who approved that access? The good news: strong governance isn't a brake on AI adoption. It's what lets organizations deploy more agents with confidence, not fewer. Three things worth doing this quarter: 1️⃣ Classify every agent in production by autonomy level 2️⃣ Assign a named owner and escalation path to each one 3️⃣ Test your kill switch before an incident forces the issue Full breakdown here: https://buff.ly/8ARLcDy #AI #AIgovernance #Cybersecurity #RiskManagement #EnterpriseTechnology

Selecting an MSP or MSSP is a risk management decision, not just an IT decision. In financial services, third-party providers often have access to critical systems, sensitive data, identity controls, and security operations. Yet accountability for risk management, incident response, and regulatory compliance remains with the firm. That's why SOC 2 matters. SOC 2 compliance demonstrates operational maturity, strong security controls, and independent validation. It can strengthen vendor due diligence, support compliance efforts, and provide greater confidence that critical services are being managed appropriately. In our latest blog, we explore why SOC 2 should be a key consideration when evaluating an MSP or MSSP, and what financial services firms should look for beyond the certification itself. 📌 Link in the first comment. #SOC2 #Cybersecurity #FinancialServices

Most tabletop exercises fail for one simple reason. They check a box but change nothing. A breach gets simulated. The plan gets reviewed. The session ends. The gaps stay. That is not readiness. That is theater. A tabletop exercise should expose where your plan breaks under pressure. Real value comes after: Findings become actions. Actions get owners. Gaps get fixed and retested. That is readiness. If your last exercise did not lead to change, it is worth asking if it was worth running at all. Read more: https://buff.ly/itXheL7 #CyberSecurity #IncidentResponse #TabletopExercise #RiskManagement

Most firms treat their MSP renewal as a formality: the contract auto-renews, the invoice is paid, and another year passes. That’s a mistake. Renewal is not just a vendor choice, but a governance decision. It determines: • How well your firm can detect and respond to a breach • Whether you can meet regulatory expectations • What evidence you can provide to insurers and investors • How defensible your security posture actually is For regulated firms, the stakes are higher. Read the full breakdown: https://buff.ly/XexNZen #Cybersecurity #MSP #RiskManagement

Cyber risk has risen to the executive agenda, shaping governance choices, insurance terms, deal timelines, and regulatory standing. Success today isn’t determined solely by having the most comprehensive policies, it requires aligned practices, resilience, and clear stakeholder readiness. Read the full analysis to see what boards, insurers, deal teams, and regulators expect: https://buff.ly/G6QbyYN #CyberRisk #Governance

AI governance isn’t just a policy issue. It’s an operational one. Many organizations have formal policies, yet few can control how AI is actually applied. That gap is where the greatest risk lives, especially with embedded vendor AI features, shadow AI adoption, and uncontrolled data exposure. Here is a practical path from policy to enforceable controls --> Link in the comments #AIGovernance #Compliance

Speed is now a governance requirement. Under the 72-hour notification rule, incident response is no longer just an IT function. It is an operational test across vendors, internal teams, and leadership. Most firms still rely on slow, informal workflows. Under new expectations, that approach breaks immediately. If your team cannot move from detection to decision in hours, not days, you are already behind. Article link in the comments! #CyberRisk #VentureCapital #Compliance #SecurityLeadership