Could AI Threats Be Brokerage Cybersecurity’s Open-Source Moment?

Monday, 21/09/2026 | 05:47 GMT by Manasseh Paradesi
  • Manasseh Paradesi, CISO at Pepperstone, believes brokers can strengthen cyber defence by sharing threat intelligence, testing controls in real-world conditions and learning from each other.
  • AI is giving attackers greater speed and scale, making it harder for brokers to rely on isolated defences. Shared intelligence and AI-driven security could help close that gap.
Cyber Defence

Cybersecurity has always been a community-driven discipline. Threat actors collaborate openly, sharing tools, techniques and infrastructure, while defenders traditionally responded by sharing intelligence, vulnerabilities and lessons learned. That collective knowledge has always been one of our greatest strengths.

London's trading industry is coming home!

That is why the recent call for collective action on cyber defence, led by OpenAI and supported by more than 100 organisations across technology, cybersecurity, financial services and critical infrastructure, is so significant. Not because of the companies involved, but because it signals a growing recognition that the traditional model of organisational self-defence may no longer be sufficient.

If AI is becoming the force multiplier for attackers, then collaborative, intelligence-driven defence has to become the force multiplier for everyone else. That is the thesis I want to unpack here, and why I think this could be an open-source moment for our industry.

From Best Practice to Collective Performance

Cybersecurity has never had more technology available than it does today. Security leaders are inundated with new products and promises. Every year, the market produces another generation of tools claiming to solve emerging threats. Yet despite this investment, organisations continue to experience breaches, ransomware events, fraud losses and operational disruption.

Cyber Defence

The problem is rarely a lack of technology, but understanding whether controls perform under real-world conditions. Too often, organisations measure security through inputs rather than outcomes. They track the number of controls implemented, policies written, vulnerabilities patched or frameworks adopted. These activities are important, but they do not necessarily reveal whether risk is being meaningfully reduced.

A firewall can be perfectly configured and still be bypassed. An incident response plan can exist on paper and fail during a crisis. A security awareness program can achieve high completion rates while employees continue to fall victim to phishing attacks.

This is where I think security experts need to get out of textbook thinking. A security gap does not automatically mean the answer is another tool; it means a control needs to be tested against how it actually behaves under pressure.

What matters most is performance. How quickly can an attack be detected? How effectively can it be contained? How quickly can an organisation recover? And can they demonstrate that a security investment has reduced risk in a measurable way?

This is precisely the kind of question that gets easier to answer collectively than alone. Australia has sometimes played catch-up in cybersecurity , but there are areas where Australian organisations have been genuinely industry-leading, and one of our strengths has been the willingness to learn from each other.

If one organisation has found an effective way to counter a particular threat, a playbook that actually held up during a live ransomware event or a detection rule that caught something others missed, others shouldn't have to rediscover it from scratch. That's the whole premise behind initiatives like the open call to action on cyber defence, turning isolated lessons into shared ones.

The AI Shift Changes the Equation

This becomes particularly important in an AI-driven threat environment, where the technology is being used to accelerate scams and fraud, with increasingly sophisticated attacks.

The foundations of cybersecurity remain essential, but the industry needs to better understand whether they can withstand an adversary that is increasingly AI-enabled and persistent. That is why organisations need to move beyond simply securing AI and start becoming AI-native in the way they operate security.

AI should help organisations identify exposure faster, analyse risk more effectively, test performance continuously and improve response capabilities. It should enable security teams to focus on higher-value work while increasing both speed and accuracy across security operations.

This is not about stopping innovation but instead creating an environment where people can adopt AI confidently and securely, and where the industry’s collective responses change at the same pace as the threats.

None of this means one-size-fits-all. One of the challenges for global organisations is that there is no single threat environment. The threat environment facing a financial services business in Australia may differ significantly from the risks encountered in Europe, the United Kingdom or the Middle East.

That's not an argument against collective defence, but it is a reason to be precise about what we're sharing. The value of collaboration isn't a single global policy that assumes every market faces the same threats. There needs to be common foundations and principles with enough flexibility to manage local threat profiles appropriately.

So instead of asking whether every part of the organisation follows the same process, security teams should be asking whether the controls are performing effectively against the real-world threats that matter in each location, informed by what the wider industry has already learned.

AI May Change the Role of the CISO

There is a temptation to respond to every new cyber threat with another tool, process or additional layer of security. But the old playbook of more people and tools to combat more threats may no longer be the answer.

The future belongs to organisations that can continuously measure effectiveness, leverage automation intelligently and use AI to improve decision-making at scale.

That requires Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) to lean further into collaboration than we have before. The new collective action model gives us a way to accelerate that learning by turning individual incident response into shared institutional memory across the industry.

The breadth of organisations supporting the collective cyber defence call is a powerful signal that the industry at large is prepared to recognise cybersecurity as a shared challenge.

Much like the open-source movement did for engineering, cybersecurity now has an opportunity to build a culture where organisations share what works, learn from what doesn’t, and build on each other’s progress rather than solving the same problems independently.

AI is making the cost of playing alone much greater, but it’s also giving the industry much better tools to play as a team.

Cybersecurity has always been a community-driven discipline. Threat actors collaborate openly, sharing tools, techniques and infrastructure, while defenders traditionally responded by sharing intelligence, vulnerabilities and lessons learned. That collective knowledge has always been one of our greatest strengths.

London's trading industry is coming home!

That is why the recent call for collective action on cyber defence, led by OpenAI and supported by more than 100 organisations across technology, cybersecurity, financial services and critical infrastructure, is so significant. Not because of the companies involved, but because it signals a growing recognition that the traditional model of organisational self-defence may no longer be sufficient.

If AI is becoming the force multiplier for attackers, then collaborative, intelligence-driven defence has to become the force multiplier for everyone else. That is the thesis I want to unpack here, and why I think this could be an open-source moment for our industry.

From Best Practice to Collective Performance

Cybersecurity has never had more technology available than it does today. Security leaders are inundated with new products and promises. Every year, the market produces another generation of tools claiming to solve emerging threats. Yet despite this investment, organisations continue to experience breaches, ransomware events, fraud losses and operational disruption.

Cyber Defence

The problem is rarely a lack of technology, but understanding whether controls perform under real-world conditions. Too often, organisations measure security through inputs rather than outcomes. They track the number of controls implemented, policies written, vulnerabilities patched or frameworks adopted. These activities are important, but they do not necessarily reveal whether risk is being meaningfully reduced.

A firewall can be perfectly configured and still be bypassed. An incident response plan can exist on paper and fail during a crisis. A security awareness program can achieve high completion rates while employees continue to fall victim to phishing attacks.

This is where I think security experts need to get out of textbook thinking. A security gap does not automatically mean the answer is another tool; it means a control needs to be tested against how it actually behaves under pressure.

What matters most is performance. How quickly can an attack be detected? How effectively can it be contained? How quickly can an organisation recover? And can they demonstrate that a security investment has reduced risk in a measurable way?

This is precisely the kind of question that gets easier to answer collectively than alone. Australia has sometimes played catch-up in cybersecurity , but there are areas where Australian organisations have been genuinely industry-leading, and one of our strengths has been the willingness to learn from each other.

If one organisation has found an effective way to counter a particular threat, a playbook that actually held up during a live ransomware event or a detection rule that caught something others missed, others shouldn't have to rediscover it from scratch. That's the whole premise behind initiatives like the open call to action on cyber defence, turning isolated lessons into shared ones.

The AI Shift Changes the Equation

This becomes particularly important in an AI-driven threat environment, where the technology is being used to accelerate scams and fraud, with increasingly sophisticated attacks.

The foundations of cybersecurity remain essential, but the industry needs to better understand whether they can withstand an adversary that is increasingly AI-enabled and persistent. That is why organisations need to move beyond simply securing AI and start becoming AI-native in the way they operate security.

AI should help organisations identify exposure faster, analyse risk more effectively, test performance continuously and improve response capabilities. It should enable security teams to focus on higher-value work while increasing both speed and accuracy across security operations.

This is not about stopping innovation but instead creating an environment where people can adopt AI confidently and securely, and where the industry’s collective responses change at the same pace as the threats.

None of this means one-size-fits-all. One of the challenges for global organisations is that there is no single threat environment. The threat environment facing a financial services business in Australia may differ significantly from the risks encountered in Europe, the United Kingdom or the Middle East.

That's not an argument against collective defence, but it is a reason to be precise about what we're sharing. The value of collaboration isn't a single global policy that assumes every market faces the same threats. There needs to be common foundations and principles with enough flexibility to manage local threat profiles appropriately.

So instead of asking whether every part of the organisation follows the same process, security teams should be asking whether the controls are performing effectively against the real-world threats that matter in each location, informed by what the wider industry has already learned.

AI May Change the Role of the CISO

There is a temptation to respond to every new cyber threat with another tool, process or additional layer of security. But the old playbook of more people and tools to combat more threats may no longer be the answer.

The future belongs to organisations that can continuously measure effectiveness, leverage automation intelligently and use AI to improve decision-making at scale.

That requires Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) to lean further into collaboration than we have before. The new collective action model gives us a way to accelerate that learning by turning individual incident response into shared institutional memory across the industry.

The breadth of organisations supporting the collective cyber defence call is a powerful signal that the industry at large is prepared to recognise cybersecurity as a shared challenge.

Much like the open-source movement did for engineering, cybersecurity now has an opportunity to build a culture where organisations share what works, learn from what doesn’t, and build on each other’s progress rather than solving the same problems independently.

AI is making the cost of playing alone much greater, but it’s also giving the industry much better tools to play as a team.

About the Author: Manasseh Paradesi
Manasseh Paradesi
  • 1 Article
About the Author: Manasseh Paradesi
Manasseh Paradesi is the Group Chief Information Security Officer at Pepperstone and a globally recognised cybersecurity, AI governance, technology risk, and data governance leader. With more than 20 years of experience across financial services and fintech, he helps organisations strengthen cyber resilience, navigate regulatory expectations, and enable innovation securely. An award-winning executive and trusted board advisor, Manasseh is known for turning cybersecurity into a business enabler through measurable outcomes, strategic leadership, and a strong focus on operational excellence, digital trust, and emerging technologies.
  • 1 Article

FinTech

!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|} !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}