{"id":2071069,"date":"2026-08-20T14:09:16","date_gmt":"2026-08-20T12:09:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/2026\/08\/20\/trust-cant-be-hacked-why-ai-is-turning-cybersecurity-into-a-matter-of-sovereignty\/"},"modified":"2026-08-20T14:21:40","modified_gmt":"2026-08-20T12:21:40","slug":"trust-cant-be-hacked-why-ai-is-turning-cybersecurity-into-a-matter-of-sovereignty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/2026\/08\/20\/trust-cant-be-hacked-why-ai-is-turning-cybersecurity-into-a-matter-of-sovereignty\/","title":{"rendered":"Trust Can’t Be Hacked: Why AI Is Turning Cybersecurity Into a Matter of Sovereignty"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

For years, cybersecurity has focused on a relatively simple question: how to protect systems. At VivaTech, the discussion between Damien Lucas and Marius Briedis showed that the real challenge of the decade will likely lie elsewhere: how to maintain trust.<\/p>\n\n

Because artificial intelligence does more than just change security tools. It challenges the very foundations on which the Internet was built: identity, authenticity, and sovereignty.<\/p>\n\n

The Age of Digital Distrust<\/h2>\n\n

One of the most interesting observations to emerge from the debate is that AI did not actually create the current crisis of trust.<\/p>\n\n

Rather, it has revealed just how fragile that trust is.<\/p>\n\n

For a long time, users assumed that the people they interacted with were real, that the information they accessed was authentic, and that digital infrastructures operated within a relatively stable framework.<\/p>\n\n

Generative AI is shattering these certainties.<\/p>\n\n

Automated creation of phishing sites, video deepfakes capable of imitating a leader, large-scale identity theft, and the generation of malicious code: operations once reserved for experienced cybercriminals are now accessible to much less skilled actors.<\/p>\n\n

As Damien Lucas summarized:<\/p>\n\n

\n

AI doesn’t just reveal vulnerabilities; it makes them exploitable on a massive scale.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

This democratization of offensive capabilities is undoubtedly one of the most significant changes observed since the advent of the cloud.<\/p>\n\n

Why Attackers Stay One Step Ahead<\/h2>\n\n

The paradox is striking.<\/p>\n\n

AI helps defenders detect vulnerabilities more quickly, analyze suspicious behavior, and automate certain monitoring tasks.<\/p>\n\n

But it also helps attackers.<\/p>\n\n

And for now, attackers seem to have a structural advantage.<\/p>\n\n

The reason is simple: the attacker doesn\u2019t need to be perfect.<\/p>\n\n

The defender, on the other hand, must be.<\/p>\n\n

A malicious actor can generate thousands of phishing attempts, create hundreds of malware variants, or automatically scan millions of lines of code in search of a flaw.<\/p>\n\n

The marginal cost is virtually zero.<\/p>\n\n

Conversely, every vulnerability detected must be verified, patched, tested, and then deployed without breaking existing systems.<\/p>\n\n

AI reduces costs for both sides, but it reduces them even more for attackers.<\/p>\n\n

This asymmetry is likely one of the main reasons for the continued increase in cybersecurity investments despite technological advances.<\/p>\n\n

The New Risk: Speed<\/h2>\n\n

Another key takeaway from the panel discussion concerns the widespread acceleration of software development.<\/p>\n\n

Code assistants and AI agents now make it possible to produce applications in a matter of hours rather than several days.<\/p>\n\n

But the speed of creation does not eliminate the need for oversight.<\/p>\n\n

On the contrary.<\/p>\n\n

The panelists highlighted a phenomenon already observed in many companies: developers are producing more code, but security teams must absorb an increasing verification workload.<\/p>\n\n

In other words, AI shifts the bottleneck.<\/p>\n\n

Code generation is now instantaneous.<\/p>\n\n

Validation remains a human task.<\/p>\n\n

This reality explains why the return on investment for AI is sometimes difficult to measure in organizations: productivity gains upstream do not automatically translate into an equivalent increase in production.<\/p>\n\n

Security and Trust: Two Different Concepts<\/h2>\n\n

One of the most pertinent points in the debate concerns the distinction between security and trust.<\/p>\n\n

Security is a matter of technology.<\/p>\n\n

Encryption, authentication, data protection, and infrastructure resilience.<\/p>\n\n

Trust is more a matter of governance.<\/p>\n\n

Who owns the data?<\/p>\n\n

Who can access it?<\/p>\n\n

In which jurisdiction is it stored?<\/p>\n\n

Who actually controls the infrastructure?<\/p>\n\n

This distinction becomes particularly important with the rise of large language models.<\/p>\n\n

Millions of users now share personal, medical, or professional information with AI systems without always knowing where that data is stored or how it is used.<\/p>\n\n

The issue is no longer just about protecting information.<\/p>\n\n

The issue is knowing whom we choose to entrust it to.<\/p>\n\n

Digital sovereignty is becoming a strategic issue<\/h2>\n\n

It is probably on this point that the debate has taken on its most political dimension.<\/p>\n\n

For years, the multi-cloud strategy was viewed as a resilience solution.<\/p>\n\n

Companies used to spread their infrastructure across multiple providers to avoid excessive dependence.<\/p>\n\n

But according to Damien Lucas, this approach no longer addresses the main emerging risk: geopolitics.<\/p>\n\n

Choosing two U.S. providers is no longer necessarily sufficient diversification.<\/p>\n\n

The risk is no longer merely technical.<\/p>\n\n

It has become regulatory, diplomatic, and strategic.<\/p>\n\n

The central question is no longer:<\/p>\n\n

\u201cHow many clouds do we use?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

But rather:<\/p>\n\n

\u201cOn which countries do our critical infrastructures depend?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

This development marks a major shift in how the cloud is perceived.<\/p>\n\n

Digital sovereignty is gradually moving beyond the realm of specialists to become a corporate governance issue.<\/p>\n\n

People Remain the Decisive Factor<\/h2>\n\n

Despite all the technological sophistication discussed during the session, the two speakers returned to an almost classic conclusion.<\/p>\n\n

The main risk factor remains human.<\/p>\n\n

Security technologies are advancing.<\/p>\n\n

Infrastructures are becoming more robust.<\/p>\n\n

Detection systems are improving.<\/p>\n\n

But users continue to click on fraudulent links, share sensitive information, or trust synthetic content.<\/p>\n\n

The example of deepfakes used to impersonate executives in fraudulent wire transfer requests perfectly illustrates this phenomenon.<\/p>\n\n

As generated content becomes indistinguishable from reality, verification is becoming a fundamental skill.<\/p>\n\n

In the future, the ability to be skeptical could become just as important as the ability to use AI.<\/p>\n\n

The Next Disruption Is Called Quantum<\/h2>\n\n

While most current discussions focus on artificial intelligence, Damien Lucas has identified another technological disruption likely to upend the cybersecurity ecosystem: quantum computing.<\/p>\n\n

While AI challenges digital trust, quantum computing could call into question some of the foundations of modern encryption.<\/p>\n\n

Organizations that are preparing today for their transition to post-quantum architectures could reap the same benefits as those that anticipated the adoption of the cloud fifteen years ago.<\/p>\n\n

The Real Issue<\/h2>\n\n

The debate ultimately highlighted a simple but essential idea.<\/p>\n\n

AI does not reduce the complexity of the digital world.<\/p>\n\n

It increases it.<\/p>\n\n

It accelerates innovation, but also vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n\n

It strengthens defensive capabilities while simultaneously amplifying those of attackers.<\/p>\n\n

Above all, it transforms trust\u2014long considered a natural consequence of technology\u2014into a strategic asset that must now be continuously built, verified, and protected.<\/p>\n\n

In the coming decade, the question will likely no longer be who has the best artificial intelligence.<\/p>\n\n

But rather, who still deserves our trust when it acts on our behalf.<\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For years, cybersecurity has focused on a relatively simple question: how to protect systems. At VivaTech, the discussion between Damien Lucas and Marius Briedis showed that the real challenge of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2063732,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[77972],"tags":[80694],"class_list":["post-2071069","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-luxury-and-ai","tag-cyber-security"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2071069","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2071069"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2071069\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2063732"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2071069"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2071069"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.luxsure.fr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2071069"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}