Shashank Bajpai, CISO & CTSO at Yotta 2026 is the execution year for India’s Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) regime , the Rules were notified in November 2025 and the government has signalled a phased enforcement timeline. The law is consent-centric, imposes heavy penalties (up to ₹250 crore for the most serious security failures), creates a new institutional stack (Data Protection Board, Consent Managers), and elevates privacy to boardroom priority. Organizations that treat compliance as a strategic investment, not a cost centre, will gain trust, operational resilience, and competitive advantage. Key themes for 2026: consent at scale, data minimization, hardened security, vendor accountability, and new dependency risks arising from Consent Manager infrastructure.

Why 2026 Matters

The DPDP Act (2023) becomes operational through Rules notified in November 2025; the result is a staggered compliance timetable that places 2026 squarely in the execution phase. That makes 2026 the inflection year when planning becomes measurable operational work and when regulators will expect visible progress. The practical effect is immediate: companies must move from policy documents to implemented consent systems, security controls, breach workflows, and vendor governance.

The High-Impact Obligations

• Explicit consent architecture: Consent must be free, specific, informed and obtained by clear affirmative action. Systems must record, revoke and propagate consent signals reliably.
• Data minimization & purpose limitation: Collect only what’s necessary and purge data when the purpose is fulfilled.
• Reasonable security safeguards: Highest penalty bracket (up to ₹250 crore) for failures to implement required security measures. Encryption, tokenization, RBAC, monitoring and secure third-party contracts are expected.
• Breach notification: Obligatory notification to the Data Protection Board and affected principals, with tight timelines (public guidance references 72-hour reporting windows for board notification).
• Data subject rights: Access, correction, erasure, withdrawal of consent and grievance mechanisms must be operational and auditable.
• Children’s data: Verifiable parental consent and prohibitions on behavioural profiling/targeted advertising toward minors; failures risk very high penalties.
• Consent Managers: New regulated intermediaries where individuals may centrally manage consent; only India-incorporated entities meeting financial/operational thresholds (minimum net worth indicated in Rules) can register. This constructs a new privacy infrastructure and a new dependency vector for data fiduciaries.

Implementation Challenges & Strategic Opportunities

1. Key Implementation Challenges

Challenge Area	What Will Break / Strain in 2026	Why It Matters to Leadership	Strategic Imperative
Regulatory Ambiguity & Evolving Interpretation	Unclear operational expectations around “informed consent,” Significant Data Fiduciary designation, and cross-border data transfers	Risk of over-engineering or non-compliance as regulatory guidance evolves	Build modular, configurable privacy architectures that can adapt without re-platforming
Legacy Systems & Distributed Data	Difficulty retrofitting consent enforcement, encryption, audit trails, and real-time controls into legacy and batch-oriented systems	High cost, operational disruption, and extended timelines for compliance	Prioritize modernization of high-risk systems and align vendor roadmaps with DPDP requirements
Organizational Governance & Talent Gaps	Privacy cuts across legal, product, engineering, HR, procurement—often without clear ownership; shortage of experienced DPOs	Fragmented accountability increases regulatory and breach risk	Establish cross-functional privacy governance; leverage fractional DPOs and external advisors while building internal capability
Children’s Data & Onboarding Friction	Age verification and parental consent slow user onboarding and impact conversion metrics	Direct revenue and growth impact if UX is not carefully redesigned	Re-engineer onboarding flows to balance compliance with user experience, especially in consumer platforms
Consent Manager Dependency & Systemic Risk	Outages or breaches at registered Consent Managers can affect multiple data fiduciaries simultaneously	Creates concentration and third-party systemic risk	Design fallback mechanisms, redundancy plans, and enforce strong SLAs and audit rights

 2. Strategic Opportunities: Turning Compliance into Advantage

Opportunity Area	Business Value	Strategic Outcome
Trust as a Market Differentiator	Privacy becomes a competitive trust signal, particularly in fintech, healthtech, and BFSI ecosystems.	Strong DPDP compliance enhances brand equity, customer loyalty, partner confidence, and investor perception.
Operational Efficiency & Risk Reduction	Data minimization, encryption, and segmentation reduce storage costs and limit breach blast radius.	Privacy investments double as technical debt reduction with measurable ROI and lower incident recovery costs.
Global Market Access	Alignment with global privacy principles simplifies cross-border expansion and compliance-sensitive partnerships.	Faster deal closures, reduced due diligence friction, and improved access to regulated international markets.
Domestic Privacy & RegTech Ecosystem Growth	Demand for Consent Managers, RegTech, and privacy engineering solutions creates a new domestic market.	Strategic opportunity for Indian vendors to lead in privacy infrastructure and export DPDP-aligned solutions globally.

DPDP Readiness Roadmap for 2026

Time Horizon	Key Actions	Primary Owners	Strategic Outcome
Immediate (0–3 Months)	• Establish Board-level Privacy Steering Committee •Appoint or contract a Data Protection Officer (DPO) • Conduct rapid enterprise data mapping (repositories, processors, high-risk data flows) • Triage high-risk systems for encryption, access controls, and logging • Update breach response runbooks to meet Board and individual notification timelines	Board, CEO, CISO, Legal, Compliance	Executive accountability for privacy; clear visibility of data risk exposure; regulatory-ready breach response posture
Short Term (3–9 Months)	• Deploy consent management platform interoperable with upcoming Consent Managers • Standardize DPDP-compliant vendor contracts and initiate bulk vendor renegotiation/audits • Automate data principal request handling (identity verification, APIs, evidence trails)	CISO, CTO, Legal, Procurement, Product	Operational DPDP compliance at scale; reduced manual handling risk; strengthened third-party governance
Medium Term (9–18 Months)	• Implement data minimization and archival policies focused on high-sensitivity datasets • Embed Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs) into product development (“privacy by design”) • Stress-test reliance on Consent Managers and negotiate resilience SLAs and contingency plans	Product, Engineering, CISO, Risk, Procurement	Sustainable compliance architecture; reduced long-term data liability; privacy-integrated product innovation
Ongoing (Board Dashboard Metrics)	• Consent fulfillment latency & revocation success rate • Mean time to detect and notify data breaches (aligned to regulatory windows) • % of sensitive data encrypted at rest and in transit • Vendor compliance score and DPA coverage	Board, CISO, Risk & Compliance	Continuous assurance, measurable compliance maturity, and defensible regulatory posture

Board-Level Takeaway

DPDP compliance in 2026 is not a one-time legal exercise, it is an operating model change. Organizations that treat privacy as a board-governed, product-integrated, and metrics-driven discipline will outperform peers on regulatory trust, customer confidence, and incident resilience.

The Macro View: Data Sovereignty & Trust Infrastructure

The Rules reinforce India’s intention to control flows of citizen data while creating domestic privacy infrastructure (DPB + Consent Managers + data auditors). This is not just regulation; it is an economic strategy to build domestic capability in cloud, identity, security and RegTech, and to position India as a credible participant in global data governance conversations.

Act Strategically, Not Reactively

DPDP is a structural shift: it will change products, engineering practices, contracts, and customer expectations. 2026 will reveal winners and laggards. Those that embrace privacy as a governance discipline and a product differentiator will realize measurable advantages in trust, operational resilience, and market value. The alternative, waiting until enforcement escalates, risks fines, reputational harm and erosion of customer trust. (This article reflects the author’s analysis and personal viewpoints and is intended for informational purposes only. It should not be construed as legal or regulatory advice.)

The beachside attack on Australia’s Jews, targeting a Hanukah gathering, reflects growing bigotry and political violence

The shock and horror that have rippled out from Bondi Beach across the world are immense. At least 16 people died at a place packed with families. A further 29 individuals suffered serious injuries. For Sunday evening’s shootings to occur in one of the most idyllic and quintessentially Australian of locations, at one of the most joyous times in the Jewish calendar, only deepens the fear and anguish felt throughout the Jewish community, across Australia and more broadly.

Authorities were quick to identify the attack as terrorism, targeting Jews as they gathered to celebrate the beginning of Hanukah on the beach. The two gunmen – one now dead, another critically injured as of Sunday night – fired on the crowds from a bridge. Parents ran with their children in their arms; elderly people struggled to flee. A car containing improvised explosive devices was found nearby and late on Sunday police were still searching for a possible third offender. Without the extraordinary courage of the man who single-handedly wrestled a gun from one attacker at the beach, and the swift response of others, this violence would probably have been still more devastating.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Mark Baker/AP

© Photograph: Mark Baker/AP

© Photograph: Mark Baker/AP

The US president’s claims to have ended eight conflicts look shakier than ever as conflict reignites in south-east Asia and the Democratic Republic of Congo

When the hastily confected Fifa world peace prize was bestowed on Donald Trump last week, the ceasefire in the Thai-Cambodian border dispute was among the achievements cited. Mr Trump also boasted of having ended war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He brags of having brought eight conflicts to a close and has just had the US Institute of Peace renamed in his honour.

Yet the truce between Thailand and Cambodia has already fallen apart. Half a million residents along the border have fled renewed fighting and civilians are among at least 27 people killed. Meanwhile, in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, at least 200,000 people have fled the advance of Rwanda-backed M23 rebels – days after a peace deal was signed in Washington.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Bonnie Cash/UPI/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Bonnie Cash/UPI/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Bonnie Cash/UPI/Shutterstock

The US is ramping up the pressure on Nicolás Maduro with a tanker seizure and expanded sanctions following threats and boat strikes

Early in his first term, Donald Trump mooted a “military option” for Venezuela to dislodge its president, Nicolás Maduro. Reports suggest that he eagerly discussed the prospect of an invasion behind closed doors. Advisers eventually talked him down. Instead, the US pursued a “maximum pressure” strategy of sanctions and threats.

But Mr Maduro is still in place. And Mr Trump’s attempts to remove him are ramping up again. The US has amassed its largest military presence in the Caribbean since the 1989 invasion of Panama. It has carried out more than 20 shocking strikes on alleged drug boats. Mr Trump reportedly delivered an ultimatum late last month, telling the Venezuelan leader that he could have safe passage from his country if he left immediately. There was already a $50m bounty on his head. This week came expanded sanctions and the seizure of a tanker.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

The UK art world is finally becoming more inclusive. But greater support must be given to the organisations that enable disabled artists to flourish

The Turner prize is no stranger to sparking debate or pushing boundaries. This year it has achieved both. For the first time, an artist with learning disabilities has won. Glasgow-born Nnena Kalu took the award for her colourful, cocoon-like sculptures made from VHS tape, clingfilm and other abandoned materials, along with her large swirling vortex drawings. Kalu is autistic, with limited verbal communication. In an acceptance speech on her behalf, Kalu’s facilitator, Charlotte Hollinshead, said that “a very stubborn glass ceiling” had been broken.

Kalu’s win is a high-profile symbol of a shift towards greater inclusivity that has been happening in the UK arts world over the past five years. Last month, Beyond the Visual opened at the Henry Moore Institute, Leeds, in which everything is curated or created by blind and partially sighted artists. The exhibits range from Moore sculptures (which visitors are encouraged to touch) to David Johnson’s 10,000 stone-plaster digestive biscuits stamped with braille. Design and Disability at the V&A South Kensington is showcasing the ways in which disabled, deaf and neurodivergent people have shaped culture from the 1940s to now.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: James Speakman/PA

© Photograph: James Speakman/PA

© Photograph: James Speakman/PA

Sir Keir Starmer promised to bring meaningful reform to the House of Lords. He is failing to introduce it

In opposition, Sir Keir Starmer called the unelected House of Lords “indefensible”. This week, barely 18 months into his prime ministership, Sir Keir took the total of unelected peers he has appointed since July 2024 to 96. Remarkably, Wednesday’s 34 new life peerages, mainly Labour supporters, take his appointment total above those of each of his four most recent Conservative predecessors. You must go back to David Cameron to find a prime minister who did more to stuff the Lords than Sir Keir.

At the last election, Labour presented itself to the voters as a party of Lords reform. The party manifesto promised to remove the remaining hereditary peers, to reform the appointments process, to impose a peers’ retirement age, and to consult on proposals for replacing the Lords with an alternative second chamber. The House of Lords, the manifesto flatly declared, was “too big”.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: WPA/Getty Images

© Photograph: WPA/Getty Images

© Photograph: WPA/Getty Images

A Tommy Robinson-inspired carol service is the latest sign of a burgeoning Christian nationalist movement. The Church of England is right to push back

The story of Christmas is a tale of poverty and flight from persecution. According to Christian tradition, humanity’s saviour is born in a stable, since Mary and Joseph are unable to find a room in Bethlehem. The holy family subsequently flee to Egypt to escape the murderous intentions of King Herod. This drama grounds the New Testament message of compassion for the stranger, the fugitive and all those who find themselves far from home. “I was hungry and you gave me food to eat,” says Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. “I was a stranger and you welcomed me.”

The spirit of a far-right show of force planned on Saturday by Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, AKA Tommy Robinson, will be somewhat different. Since reportedly converting fully to Christianity while serving a prison sentence for contempt of court, Mr Yaxley-Lennon has energetically deployed his faith to promote his own gospel of ethnic discord and political polarisation. The Unite the Kingdom rally he organised in July featured hymns, a plethora of wooden crosses and a Christian preacher who spoke of a war against “the Muslim”. His latest provocation is a “carol service” in central London, ostensibly to “put Christ back in Christmas”.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

© Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

© Photograph: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

Calls to modernise human rights law too often assume that hostile public opinion cannot be changed by argument from first principles

Arguments over the role of the European convention on human rights in asylum policy express a tension between the politics of an ever-changing world and the principle of immutable humanitarian values.

When Sir Keir Starmer observes that population flows in 2025 are different to conditions 75 years ago, when the ECHR was drafted, and that governments have a duty to adapt to the change, he is responding to political reality.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Yoan Valat/EPA

© Photograph: Yoan Valat/EPA

© Photograph: Yoan Valat/EPA

Austerity hollowed out provision and hardened eligibility rules. A broken safety net now shuts out the poorest and drives rising homelessness

Moral logic is flipped on its head in England’s benefits system, which systematically excludes the poorest people from the only housing that was ever intended for them. Social homes were supposed to be for those who couldn’t afford private rents. However, a new report by Crisis shows that, because the stock of homes has been allowed to collapse, housing associations now ration supply by applying strict affordability tests. The homeless charity found that seven in 10 people with a history of rent arrears and no repayment plan would “sometimes” or “always” be excluded from housing registers. Perversely, England’s welfare system induces the very homelessness that it claims to alleviate.

Financial checks, along with rules requiring “local connections”, sharply narrow who can join the queue for social housing. For those who do, a further round of pre-tenancy checks means that about a third of housing associations refuse accommodation because applicants cannot afford even modest rents, a problem rooted in benefit levels that are simply too low. Homelessness therefore rises by design rather than accident. Its origins lie in the coalition’s austerity programme: instead of building social homes, which would have eased pressure on welfare, the government redefined who could qualify. The then chancellor George Osborne, it was said, resisted building houses that might create Labour voters.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Nathaniel Noir/Alamy

© Photograph: Nathaniel Noir/Alamy

© Photograph: Nathaniel Noir/Alamy

The White House is aggressively seeking to weaken and dominate the United States’ traditional allies. European leaders must learn to fight back.

Sir Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron and Friedrich Merz have become adept at scrambling to deal with the latest bad news from Washington. Their meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Downing Street on Monday was so hastily arranged that Mr Macron needed to be back in Paris by late afternoon to meet Croatia’s prime minister, while Mr Merz was due on television for an end-of-year Q&A with the German public.

But diplomatic improvisation alone cannot fully answer Donald Trump’s structural threat to European security. The US president and his emissaries are trying to bully Mr Zelenskyy into an unjust peace deal that suits American and Russian interests. In response, the summit helped ramp up support for the use of up to £100bn in frozen Russian assets as collateral for a “reparations loan” to Ukraine. European counter-proposals for a ceasefire will need to be given the kind of financial backing that provides Mr Zelenskyy with leverage at a critical moment.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Alex Brandon/AP

© Photograph: Alex Brandon/AP

© Photograph: Alex Brandon/AP

Weak regulation is to blame for disastrous failures in relation to pollution. But there are solutions if people get behind them

A study suggesting that as many as 168m light-up Christmas ornaments and similar items could be thrown out in a single year, in the UK, is concerning if not surprising in light of longstanding challenges around recycling rates and waste reduction. Even if the actual figure is lower, there is no question that battery-powered and electrical toys, lights and gifts are proliferating as never before. Despite a great deal of commentary aimed at dialling down consumption over the festive season, especially surplus packaging and rubbish, strings of disposable lights and flashing figures have gained in popularity. Homes, front gardens and shopping streets grow sparklier by the year.

Batteries and electrical devices present particular difficulties when it comes to disposal, because they cause fires. But they are just one part of a more general problem of excessive waste – and weak regulatory oversight. British plastic waste exports rose by 5% in 2024 to nearly 600,000 tonnes. A new report on plastics from the Pew Charitable Trusts warns that global production is expected to rise by 52% by 2040 – to 680m tonnes – outstripping the capacity of waste management systems around the world.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

By Kannan Srinivasan, Business Head – Cybersecurity, Happiest Minds Technologies Cyber resilience means being prepared for anything that might disrupt your systems. It’s about knowing how to get ready, prevent problems, recover quickly, and adapt when a cyber incident occurs. Generative AI, or GenAI, has become a big part of how many organizations work today. About 70% of industries are already using it, and over 95% of US companies have adopted it in some form. GenAI is now supporting nearly every area, including IT, finance, legal, and marketing. It even helps doctors make faster decisions, students learn more effectively, and shoppers find better deals. But what happens if GenAI breaks, gets messed up, or stops working? Once AI is part of your business, you need a stronger plan to stay safe and steady. Here are some simple ways organizations can build their cyber resilience in this AI-driven world.

A Practical Guide to Cyber Resilience in the GenAI Era

1. Get Leadership and the Board on Board

Leading the way in cyber resilience starts with your leaders. Keep your board and senior managers in the loop about the risks that come with GenAI. Get their support, make sure it lines up with your business goals, and secure enough budget for safety measures and training. Make talking about cyber safety a regular part of your meetings.

2. Know Where GenAI Is Being Used

Make a list of all departments and processes using GenAI. Note which models you're using, who manages them, and what they’re used for. Then, do a quick risk check—what could happen if a system goes down? This helps you understand the risks and prepare better backup plans.

3. Check for Weak Spots Regularly

Follow trusted guidelines like OWASP for testing your GenAI systems. Regular checks can spot issues like data leaks or misuse early. Fix problems quickly to stay ahead of potential risks.

4. Improve Threat Detection and Response

Use security tools that keep an eye on your GenAI systems all the time. These tools should spot unusual activity, prevent data loss, and help investigate when something goes wrong. Make sure your cybersecurity team is trained and ready to act fast.

5. Use More Than One AI Model

Don’t rely on just one AI tool. Having multiple models from different providers helps keep things running smoothly if one faces problems. For example, if you’re using OpenAI, consider adding options like Anthropic Claude or Google Gemini as backups. Decide which one is your main and which ones are backups.

6. Update Your Incident Plans

Review and update your plans for dealing with incidents to include GenAI, making sure they meet new rules like the EU AI Act. Once done, test them with drills so everyone knows what to do in a real emergency.

Conclusion

Cyber resilience in the GenAI era is a continuous process. As AI grows, the need for stronger governance, smarter controls, and proactive planning grows with it. Organizations that stay aware, adaptable, and consistent in their approach will continue to build trust and reliability. GenAI opens doors to efficiency and creativity, and resilience ensures that progress stays uninterrupted. The future belongs to those who stay ready, informed, and confident in how they manage technology.

Cyble and the Botswana Communications Regulatory Authority (BOCRA) have announced a strategic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The Cyble and BOCRA MoU is designed to provide stronger defenses, improved detection capabilities, and faster incident response for critical sectors across Botswana.  The agreement, formed in collaboration with the Botswana National CSIRT, marks an important step toward enhancing the country’s national cybersecurity posture at a time when global cyber threats continue to escalate.  

Strengthening National Cybersecurity Capabilities 

Under the Cyble and BOCRA MoU, both organizations will work closely to advance Botswana’s cybersecurity ecosystem. The collaboration will focus on building stronger cyber defense mechanisms, improving incident response readiness, and equipping national cybersecurity teams with access to Cyble threat intelligence technologies.  Cyble will provide BOCRA with real-time intelligence on emerging threats, leveraging its proprietary AI-native platforms that monitor malicious activity across the open, deep, and dark web. This advanced situational awareness will help Botswana’s security teams quickly identify risk indicators, detect suspicious activity, and mitigate threats before they escalate. The partnership aims to reduce the impact of cyber incidents on citizens, enterprises, and critical national infrastructure. 

Expanding Cyber Skills and Knowledge Transfer 

Another essential focus area of the Cyble and BOCRA MoU is capacity building. The agreement includes initiatives to enhance cybersecurity skills, support workforce development, and promote knowledge transfer. This is expected to help Botswana establish a sustainable talent pipeline capable of addressing modern cyber risks.  According to Cyble, strengthening human expertise is as crucial as deploying technical solutions. Training programs, workshops, and shared intelligence efforts will support BOCRA and the Botswana National CSIRT in their mandate to safeguard the country’s digital landscape.  Manish Chachada, Co-founder and COO of Cyble, emphasized the importance of this collaboration. “This partnership reflects our continued commitment to supporting national cybersecurity priorities across Africa. By combining Cyble’s threat intelligence expertise with BOCRA’s regulatory leadership, we are confident in our ability to strengthen Botswana’s cyber resilience and help the nation navigate the rapidly evolving threat landscape,” he said. 

About BOCRA 

The Botswana Communications Regulatory Authority serves as the national body responsible for regulating the communications sector, advancing cybersecurity programs, enhancing digital infrastructure resilience, and promoting cyber awareness across the country. As cyber threats grow more complex, BOCRA’s role in coordinating national cyber readiness becomes increasingly critical. 

About Cyble 

Cyble, an AI-first cybersecurity company, is recognized globally for its expertise in dark web intelligence, digital risk protection, and predictive cyber defense. Its platforms process more than 50TB of threat data daily, helping organizations detect, measure, and mitigate risks in real time. Cyble works with Fortune 500 enterprises and government entities worldwide, supporting the shift toward intelligent, autonomous cybersecurity solutions.  The Cyble and BOCRA MoU reinforces the shared vision of both organizations to ensure a safer, more secure digital future for Botswana.  Explore how Cyble’s AI-powered threat intelligence and digital risk protection solutions can help your business stay ahead of emerging risks.  Visit www.cyble.com to learn more. 

Striving for digital transformation, organizations are innovating at an incredibly fast pace. They deploy new applications, services, and platforms daily, creating great opportunities for growth and efficiency. However, this speedy transformation comes with a significant, often overlooked, consequence: an accumulated massive vulnerability backlog. This ever-expanding list of unpatched software flaws, system misconfigurations, and coding errors is a silent drain on an organization's most valuable resources.  For many IT and security teams, the vulnerability backlog is a source of constant pressure and a seemingly unwinnable battle. As soon as they deploy one batch of patches, a new wave of critical vulnerabilities is disclosed.   This reactive cybersecurity approach is both unsustainable and incredibly costly. The true price of a vulnerability backlog extends far beyond the person-hours spent on patching. It manifests as operational friction, stifled innovation, employee burnout, and a persistent, elevated risk of a catastrophic cyberattack.   To truly secure the modern enterprise, leaders must look beyond traditional scanning and patching cycles and embrace a new, proactive paradigm for vulnerability management. 

The Anatomy of a Swelling Vulnerability Backlog

A vulnerability backlog is the aggregate of all known but unaddressed security weaknesses within an organization’s IT environment. These weaknesses can range from critical flaws in open-source libraries and commercial software to misconfigured cloud services and insecure code pushed during quick development cycles.  There are three principal reasons the backlog grows incessantly: 

1. The sheer volume of newly discovered vulnerabilities, numbering in the tens of thousands each year
2. The complexity of modern, hybrid environments, where assets are spread across on-premises data centers and multiple cloud providers
3. The monumental challenge of tracking and patching every critical vulnerability

The growing mountain of security weaknesses creates a form of vulnerability debt. It accumulates when you defer patching due to operational constraints, resource limitations, or the fear of breaking critical applications.  The longer a vulnerability remains unpatched, the more time attackers have to develop exploits and launch attacks and turn even a low-priority issue into a full-blown crisis. 

The True, Multifaceted Cost of Inaction 

The costs associated with a large vulnerability backlog are both direct and indirect, affecting your organization’s financial health, operational agility, and human capital. 

Financial and Operational Drains 

The most obvious cost is the direct expense of remediation. That includes the salaries of security professionals who spend countless hours identifying, prioritizing, and deploying patches.  However, the indirect costs are often far greater. Developer productivity plummets when teams are constantly pulled away from building new features to address security issues. It affects the time-to-market for new products and services, handing an advantage to more agile competitors.  In case of a breach from an unpatched vulnerability, the financial fallout can be devastating. It can encompass everything from regulatory fines and legal fees to customer compensation and a drop in stock value. 

The Human Toll 

Beyond the financial and operational impact is the human cost. When security teams drown in a sea of alerts, alert fatigue is unavoidable. And with it, missed critical warnings amidst the terrible alert noise, too.  The constant pressure and the feeling of being perpetually behind contribute to high levels of stress and burnout, resulting in the high turnover of skilled security talent. And here is your vicious cycle: experienced professionals leave; the remaining team is stretched even thinner; and the backlog continues to grow.  This state can also strain the relationship between security, development, and operations teams, preventing the collaboration necessary for a healthy DevSecOps culture. 

From a Reactive to a Proactive Protection 

Instead of “How can we patch faster?”, the more effective question is, “How can we neutralize security risk before we patch vulnerabilities?”.  The answer lies in moving from a predominantly reactive posture revolving around patching and response to a proactive one centered around mitigation. A robust patchless mitigation platform can effectively shield your organization’s environment from exploitation, regardless of the length of your patching cycles.  For instance, Virsec provides powerful compensating controls that prevent malicious actors from exploiting a vulnerability even if it is there and unpatched.  This approach decouples cybersecurity protection from the act of patching. It gives teams the breathing room to remediate vulnerabilities in a planned, methodical way without leaving critical systems exposed to immediate threats.  Applying these mitigation controls at scale is where the smart application of artificial intelligence becomes essential. AI-driven security tools can automate burdensome tasks in security operations centers (SOCs) and security teams.  As an illustration, Virsec’s OTTOGUARD.AI leverages agentic AI to improve security operations’ efficiency in the following way: 

1. AI agents autonomously deploy and configure security probes to determine which code and software to trust.
2. They integrate with your existing cybersecurity tool stack to analyze telemetry, assess your risk environment, and identify assets that can be protected immediately (without patching).
3. They then interface with IT service management platforms, such as ServiceNow, presenting human experts with validated remediation and patching solutions for the remaining issues. Human experts have the final word, reviewing the suggested solutions and deciding whether to act on them.

Foster a Culture of Shared Responsibility 

Technology alone is not a panacea. The most effective vulnerability management programs stand on a strong security culture that breaks down silos between development, security, and operations.  Hence, before anything else, strive to build this culture of collaboration and unified goals. It will inevitably instill a sense of shared responsibility for your organization’s security posture and motivate every individual to be a proactive guardian against threats. 

Final Thoughts 

By combining proactive protection with AI-driven automation and a culture of shared responsibility, organizations can begin to tame their vulnerability backlogs.  This multi-layered approach helps you reduce the risk of a breach, frees up valuable resources, accelerates innovation, and builds a more resilient and future-proof enterprise.  Its goal is to transform security from a cost center and a source of friction into a true business enabler. Because that's what cybersecurity really is: an essential business enabler that makes it possible for organizations to innovate with confidence in an increasingly complex digital world. 

Manish Mimani, founder and CEO of Protectt.ai For years, static passwords, dynamic One-time Passwords (OTPs), and Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) have been the foundation of mobile app security. They have helped users verify their identities and kept unauthorized access at bay. But today, that’s no longer enough. Modern fraudsters aren’t just trying to break through login screens — they are targeting what happens after you log in. Post-authentication fraud is rising at an alarming pace across mobile-first industries like BFSI, fintech, and digital commerce. Fraudsters bypass identity checks altogether by compromising runtime environments, targeting APIs, or exploiting device vulnerabilities, often without ever touching credentials. The biggest misconception in mobile app security today is: If the login is secure, the app is secure. That couldn’t be further from the truth!

Mobile App Security Risks Don’t Stop at Login

Runtime Blind Spots: Once users log in, most apps assume the environment is safe. It is not.

• Malware, repackaged apps, and overlay attacks exploit runtime weaknesses.
• Fraudsters hijack active sessions and execute transactions from within.

Compromised Devices: A secure app on a rooted or jailbroken device is vulnerable.

• Malicious keyboard overlays, screen sharing, and unsafe environments open hidden backdoors.

Unsecured APIs: Many fraudsters bypass the UI entirely.

• Weak APIs are prime targets for token replay, man-in-the-middle exploits, and automated fraud.

Result: Fraud happens after successful authentication — where most defences do not exist.

The Solution: Build Defence Inside the App

To counter post-authentication threats, security must be intrinsic; not just guard the login. Embed Protection with Runtime Application Self-Protection (RASP)

• RASP sits inside the application, detecting and blocking malicious activity the moment it occurs.
• It thwarts tampering, reverse engineering, overlay attacks, and session hijacking in real time.
• Unlike static perimeter defences, RASP protects every user interaction across any network, device, or location. It transforms your app from a passive target into an active shield.

Enforce Continuous Device Integrity

• Validate the trustworthiness of the device at every step.
• Detect rooted or jailbroken devices, malicious tools, or unsafe conditions.
• Apply adaptive responses — restrict high-risk functions or block sensitive actions entirely.

Secure the API Layer End-to-End

• Treat APIs as critical attack surfaces.
• Harden with encryption, authentication, behavioural monitoring, and anomaly detection.
• Stop fraud before it can bypass the UI.

Authentication Is Just the Start Login protection is necessary, but no longer sufficient. True mobile app security is layered:

• RASP for in-app runtime defence.
• Device Integrity for trusted environments.
• API Protection for invisible attack surfaces.

Fraudsters have evolved. Thus, security must be built inside, not just around. The challenge is no longer just about the OTP; it is also about what happens after the OTP is validated. For mobile-first industries like BFSI, fintech, and digital commerce, the mobile app security of their business empires depends entirely on this strategic shift. Authentication starts the journey; RASP ensures protection every step of the way.