Cybersecurity: Who Has The Advantage?

The digital battleground is perpetually shifting, a shadow war waged in lines of code and network protocols.

For years, the conventional wisdom held that cybercriminals, unfettered by ethics or bureaucracy, always maintained the upper hand.

They moved with agility, exploited novel vulnerabilities, and vanished into the digital ether, leaving defenders to pick up the pieces.

But in this relentless conflict, who truly has the advantage?

That was the crucial question recently posed to some of the nation’s leading security experts at InfoSecurity Europe 2025, and their candid responses offer a fascinating, albeit sobering, glimpse into the minds at the forefront of cybersecurity.

It’s an inherent truth of this war: defenders are always, by nature, on the back foot.

They must protect every possible entry point, while attackers only need to find one weakness.

This foundational asymmetry shapes much of the expert sentiment.

“They have always had it, and they will continue to have it; the bad guys,” declared Guido Grillenmeier, Principal Technologist EMEA at Semperis, with a bluntness that resonated through many conversations.

This sentiment, that the scales are perpetually tipped, was echoed by Richard McKinley from Sonatype.

“We’re always going to be playing catch-up,” he explained, highlighting the reactive nature of defense.

“Because they’re going to be inventing new ways and there’s always an element of responsiveness.

We’re obviously trying to get out ahead of the trends but we kind of have to respond to the trends.

Honestly, the industry rather than the cyber security professionals themselves are behind.”

The advent of artificial intelligence, a double-edged sword in this conflict, is further complicating matters.

Ian Higgison from ZeroFox pointed out that AI is democratizing cybercrime, empowering individuals previously lacking the technical prowess to become formidable threat actors.

“I would say criminals have the advantage right now because AI is empowering people that are not as tech-minded to have an easy entrance into being a threat-actor.”

His colleague, Fiona Lau, reinforced this, stating criminals are “always one step ahead,” necessitating constant “pivot” from security companies to stay relevant.

Yet, within this seemingly grim assessment, a fascinating psychological dynamic emerges.

Adam Matthews, Senior Solution Engineer from Okta, argued that this ‘underdog’ mentality might actually be a hidden strength for security teams.

“I think criminals always have the upper hand.

If you think that way, then you’re in a good spot.

If think you’re good, you’re in trouble,” he mused, suggesting that a healthy dose of paranoia and self-awareness keeps defenders vigilant and innovative, preventing complacency from setting in.

Perhaps the most profound insight into the asymmetry of this conflict comes from the ethical and moral constraints that bind defenders, but not their adversaries.

Brett Taylor, Solutions Engineering Director for the UK and Ireland for Sentinel One, articulated this stark difference:

“Their only motivation is money, the mission, and getting either the intellectual property or disruption.

They don’t care, whereas we have more of an altruistic view and use of the technology.”

This moral compass, while essential for a functioning society, often means defenders cannot employ the same aggressive, no-holds-barred tactics available to criminals.

While defenders grapple with the ethical implications of powerful tools like AI, considering who might misuse them once deployed, attackers face no such qualms.

They leverage automation and cloud assets for brute force attacks with absolute disregard for the ethical line defenders must tread.

However, the narrative isn’t entirely one of perpetual disadvantage.

A subtle shift, a turning tide, is perceptible.

AI, while empowering criminals, is also becoming a formidable weapon in the hands of defenders.

Ayanda Chiwuta, Hadrian’s Head of Demand Generation, expressed optimism about AI’s potential to level the playing field.

“I think with the use of AI models, we can start predicting a little more readily what might be the next attack vector that is exploited.”

This predictive capability, mirroring the methodologies hackers might employ, offers a proactive stance previously unimaginable, moving beyond mere responsiveness.

Dr. Oakley Cox, Director of Product at DarkTrace, echoed this cautious optimism, asserting that “overall, the defenders are doing a good job.”

He cited the growing understanding and engagement from governments and the public sector, coupled with stronger regulations, as critical factors contributing to a more favorable environment for security teams.

While acknowledging the inherent challenge that attackers only need to succeed once, Dr. Cox believes that the collective efforts are positioning defenders in a “good place.”

Brett Taylor, despite his earlier observations on moral restrictions, also highlighted that defenders often have the upper hand in terms of resources and the ability to influence policy, particularly concerning the vast infrastructure needed to train and deploy advanced AI models, which governments can exert national control over.

The prevailing mood at Infosec 2025, despite the candid admissions of an uphill battle, was one of determined optimism.

The experts, acutely aware of the challenges and the relentless innovation of their adversaries, also demonstrated confidence in their evolving tools, strategies, and the growing collective intelligence of the cybersecurity community.

The war is far from over, and the advantage may continue to swing like a pendulum.

But for now, the defenders, armed with an underdog mindset, cutting-edge AI, and a strong moral conviction, appear well-positioned to meet the escalating threat, ensuring that the digital frontier remains defensible, even if the fight is eternal.