{"id":24670,"date":"2026-05-01T17:41:06","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T17:41:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/24670\/"},"modified":"2026-05-01T17:41:06","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T17:41:06","slug":"army-plans-fast-follow-up-to-ai-cyber-wargame-with-industry-officials","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/24670\/","title":{"rendered":"Army plans fast follow-up to AI cyber wargame with industry: Officials"},"content":{"rendered":"

WASHINGTON \u2014 A recent cyber wargame<\/a> with senior tech industry executives has the US Army considering more autonomy for AI \u201cagents,\u201d especially in wartime, including development of a \u201crisk continuum\u201d policy for when it might have to let agentic AI watchdogs off the leash. <\/p>\n

\u201cShould the degree of human involvement vary based on the situation we\u2019re in?\u201d Brandon Pugh<\/a>, principal cyber advisor to Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll<\/a>, told reporters Wednesday. \u201cIf we\u2019re facing a slew of cybersecurity attacks against us in a time of conflict, perhaps there\u2019s a different risk appetite than in normal peacetime.\u201d <\/p>\n

Officially called \u201cAI Table Top Exercise 2.0\u201d (AI TTX), Monday\u2019s wargame deliberately presented its participants with a dire scenario: It\u2019s 2027, and a crisis in the Indo-Pacific<\/a> has escalated into a cyber war against US military networks. Participants included executives from 14 tech companies as well as the inter-service US Cyber Command<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe premise was that an adversary was leveraging AI [to] launch salvo after salvo of attacks that continuously adapted to the Army\u2019s defensive posture and did so arguably faster than a human defender could keep up with,\u201d Pugh said.<\/p>\n

New AI tools, operating largely autonomously with minimal human oversight<\/a>, can find cyber vulnerabilities and attack them faster than human defenders can plug the holes, said Lt. Gen. Christopher Eubank<\/a>, head of Army Cyber Command.<\/p>\n

In \u201cthis brave new world of agentic AI \u2026 to tell somebody to \u2018patch faster\u2019 is just unrealistic,\u201d he told reporters.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo how do you use AI to get to a place where we\u2019re not limited by human speed anymore?\u201d Eubank asked. \u201cWhere does AI have autonomy to do things in the cyberspace defense environment?\u201d<\/p>\n

AI is already helping detect intrusions on Defense Department networks, Pugh explained, but what\u2019s needed now is agentic AI<\/a> that can not just warn human operators of an attack in progress but autonomously take action to stop the breach.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re fantastic at leveraging AI for detection,\u201d he said. \u201cHow do we now continue to drive that forward with, you know, agentic capabilities to not only detect, but to do a response action?\u201d<\/p>\n

The wargame didn\u2019t give definitive answers to these complex questions. Designed and orchestrated for the Army by the independent Strategic Competitive Studies Project<\/a>, the exercise didn\u2019t attempt a detailed blow-by-blow simulation. Instead, it followed a more freeform seminar format where each of the 14 executives offered their suggestions on how to handle the hypothetical conflict, followed by questions from military officers and officials.<\/p>\n

Those private sector perspectives gave the military a lot to think about. Many of the industry executives have \u201cstruggled with the same things we struggle with,\u201d Eubank said.<\/p>\n

The exercise also suggested some concrete steps the service could take in short order.<\/p>\n

For instance, the Army plans to rapidly acquire some AI tools suggested by the exercise and deploy them to two cyber defense units for testing, using rapid-procurement funds set aside beforehand. These capabilities will be picked from what industry has already developed rather than laboriously developed to military specifications, Pugh emphasized.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe don\u2019t have the luxury of \u2026 long acquisition pipelines,\u201d he told reporters. \u201cWe don\u2019t need to start from scratch.\u201d<\/p>\n

What\u2019s arguably more significant than any specific software, however, is potential changes to policy, procedures, and organization, Eubank said.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is much more than technology. This is about the human workforce. It\u2019s about organizational structure,\u201d the general told reporters. \u201c I wrote down 19 things\u2026and none of them are a product.\u201d<\/p>\n

In particular, he said, \u201cI think the biggest thing ARCYBER walked away with was we\u2019ve got to determine risk acceptance in the artificial intelligence environment with the use of agents.\u201d In other words, there may be circumstances where the cyber threat is sufficiently dire and fast-moving that the military may need to let AI agents make high-stakes decisions and take autonomous action in domains that today are the sole purview of human beings.<\/p>\n

Eubank and his staff are now figuring out this new cyber warfighting doctrine. \u201cI walked away telling my team, okay, we probably need to come up with what that risk acceptance continuum looks like,\u201d he said. \u201cThat was probably one of the biggest things I learned.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"WASHINGTON \u2014 A recent cyber wargame with senior tech industry executives has the US Army considering more autonomy…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":24671,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[179,24,4602,16733,16734,25,111,16735,387,16736,1393,7451,151,134,16737],"class_list":{"0":"post-24670","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-ai","8":"tag-agentic-ai","9":"tag-ai","10":"tag-ai-autonomy","11":"tag-ai-ttx-2-0","12":"tag-army-cyber-command-arcyber","13":"tag-artificial-intelligence","14":"tag-artificial-intelligence-ai","15":"tag-brandon-pugh","16":"tag-china","17":"tag-christopher-eubank","18":"tag-cyber-security","19":"tag-indo-pacific","20":"tag-networks","21":"tag-technology","22":"tag-wargames"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24670","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24670"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24670\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/24671"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24670"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24670"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24670"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}