editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links
to our partners.
Learn More
Security teams aren’t just fighting more attacks — they’re fighting faster ones, and the gap between detection and damage is shrinking by the day.
As AI accelerates phishing, impersonation, and automated reconnaissance, organizations are finding that traditional “detect-and-respond” approaches struggle to keep up when the weakest link is still human decision-making.
“The threat landscape has fundamentally shifted. AI is compressing attack timelines, enabling social engineering at unprecedented scale and sophistication, and traditional detect-and-respond models simply can’t keep pace,” said Ashley Rose, CEO of Living Security in an email to eSecurityPlanet.
She added,” When attackers are using AI to bypass filters with culturally fluent, personalized phishing and AI agents are becoming the new shadow IT, security teams need technology that predicts and prevents rather than just reacts.”
Human Error Still Drives Breaches
This is less a tooling problem and more an operating model problem.
Many organizations have already invested heavily in security controls, awareness training, and monitoring platforms — yet the outcomes haven’t improved at the same rate as the threats.
According to the 2025 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR), human error still contributes to roughly 60% of breaches, even as security budgets and vendor ecosystems expand.
That’s why Human Risk Management (HRM) is gaining momentum as an approach focused on identifying high-risk behaviors early and reducing the likelihood of compromise before a breach occurs.
What Human Risk Management Really Means
HRM isn’t simply a rebranding of awareness training — it’s a framework for measuring risk like security teams measure vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and identity exposures.
Instead of assuming training completion equals readiness, HRM emphasizes whether behaviors are trending in the right direction and whether risk is declining over time.
This matters because attackers increasingly rely on techniques that bypass traditional security filters by exploiting normal human instincts: urgency, authority, helpfulness, and familiarity.
AI makes these tactics more scalable and more convincing, generating phishing attempts that appear culturally fluent, personalized, and context-aware.
In many cases, the attacker no longer needs sophisticated malware or exploit chains — just one compromised identity and a path to escalate access.
A second disruption is happening alongside this: AI agents and automations are becoming embedded in enterprise workflows.
These tools can improve productivity, but they can also introduce new forms of shadow IT, risky permissions, and inadvertent data exposure — especially when employees adopt unsanctioned tools or connect AI agents to sensitive systems without guardrails.
Small Mistakes, Big Security Incidents
From a practical security perspective, the most concerning aspect of human risk is that it rarely appears as a single catastrophic action.
Instead, breaches often start with small decisions that compound over time:
- Clicking a convincing phishing lure during a busy period.
- Reusing credentials across multiple services.
- Approving an OAuth app without understanding its access scope.
- Granting excessive permissions to “move faster.”
- Using an AI tool to summarize sensitive data outside approved systems.
Each of these behaviors may look harmless in isolation.
But combined, they can create the ideal conditions for credential theft, lateral movement, and data loss — especially when attackers use AI to tailor their messaging and timing for maximum success.
This is the core idea behind modern HRM: risk isn’t static.
It trends, builds, and spikes based on context, access levels, and behavior patterns. The organizations that respond effectively are the ones that can spot those trajectories early and intervene quickly.
How to Reduce Human Risk
As AI-driven attacks become faster and more personalized, organizations need to reduce human-centered risk without relying solely on reactive alerts or annual training.
A strong Human Risk Management strategy focuses on preventing compromise by tightening identity controls, improving visibility into risky behaviors, and embedding guardrails into everyday workflows.
- Strengthen identity security by enforcing phishing-resistant MFA, applying least privilege, and regularly reviewing privileged access paths.
- Govern AI tools and agents by standardizing approved options, restricting third-party integrations and OAuth permissions, and inventorying access levels.
- Reduce social engineering exposure by hardening email and messaging controls, blocking common spoofing tactics, and limiting risky forwarding and attachments.
- Deliver continuous, role-based interventions with short training moments, real-time feedback after risky actions, and team-level reinforcement through security champions.
- Minimize data loss impact by tightening sharing defaults, applying lightweight data classification, and using DLP controls for common exfiltration paths.
- Add smart guardrails at high-risk moments by using step-up authentication, browser protections, and confirmations for sensitive actions or unusual behavior.
- Improve resilience and response by monitoring behavior-based signals, securing high-fraud business workflows, and maintaining incident response playbooks for account takeover and BEC.
Taken together, these steps help organizations proactively reduce human and AI-driven risk before it turns into a major breach.
AI Is Reshaping Human Risk
Ultimately, Human Risk Management is becoming essential because AI has raised both the speed and the stakes of modern attacks, leaving organizations little room to rely on reactive defenses alone.
By treating human behavior and AI agent activity as measurable risk signals — and responding with targeted controls, workflow guardrails, and continuous intervention — security leaders can reduce exposure without overwhelming teams with more tools or noise.
As organizations work to contain this expanding risk surface, many are turning to zero-trust principles to limit access, reduce implicit trust, and stop breaches from spreading.
