The New Apex Predator: CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz on Adversaries Armed With AI Agents

“The new apex predator is the agent state. The same level of capability that a nation state would have just a few years ago, essentially a hacktivist would have today.”

Claim: George Kurtz says a hacktivist today can have essentially the same level of capability that a nation-state actor had a few years ago.

“The new apex predator is the agent state. The same level of capability that a nation state would have just a few years ago, essentially a hacktivist would have today.”

Claim: George Kurtz characterizes the agent state as the new apex predator in cybersecurity.

“That has dramatically changed the overall threat environment. What people have to keep in mind is it, it's not malware anymore, it's prompts. They can basically engineer prompts that would create a totally unique signature of what direction they're gonna go in, how they gather information, where they pivot.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the agent state has dramatically changed the overall cybersecurity threat environment.

“That has dramatically changed the overall threat environment. What people have to keep in mind is it, it's not malware anymore, it's prompts. They can basically engineer prompts that would create a totally unique signature of what direction they're gonna go in, how they gather information, where they pivot.”

Claim: George Kurtz says adversaries can engineer prompts that produce a unique signature in their attack direction, information gathering, and pivots.

“Everyone's coming to CrowdStrike and others going, "Well, how do you make AI secure so we can go faster in AI?" The only way to fight AI today is with better AI.”

Claim: George Kurtz asserts that the only way to fight AI today is with better AI.

“The defender knows their own systems. The defender has the architectural diagram. The defender has the code. How do you put all of that into something that you can dramatically increase your probability of outsmarting the offensive AI?”

Claim: George Kurtz says defenders know their own systems and have access to their architectural diagrams and code.

“It's been incredible in the enterprise what we've seen. If you follow the trajectory of the, the frontier labs and you just look at their own revenue, you can see just how many more agents are out there, whether it's Claude Code or Codex, uh, they're popping up all over the, uh, all over the environment.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the revenue of frontier AI labs can serve as a proxy for the number of agents in use.

“It's been incredible in the enterprise what we've seen. If you follow the trajectory of the, the frontier labs and you just look at their own revenue, you can see just how many more agents are out there, whether it's Claude Code or Codex, uh, they're popping up all over the, uh, all over the environment.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI agents such as Claude Code and Codex are appearing throughout enterprise environments.

“Obviously, there's many other type of agents that are out there, but again, just using that as a proxy. And, um, you know, what we've seen is that they're, they're popping up everywhere, and part of the problem in, in these enterprises is they have no idea where they're popping up.”

Claim: George Kurtz says many enterprises do not know where AI agents are appearing in their environments.

“Shadow AI has become a huge issue for many companies. Um, I know we're gonna talk about what the agents are doing and all the bad sort of things that are happening, but just in general, having organizations understand where their AI is taking place and who's doing what, and more importantly, what identity are they actually operating under, uh, has been a big challenge in the industry and, uh, a big focus for us at CrowdStrike in, in trying to crack the code for our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says organizations face a major challenge in identifying where AI is used, who is using it, and the identities under which it operates.

“Shadow AI has become a huge issue for many companies. Um, I know we're gonna talk about what the agents are doing and all the bad sort of things that are happening, but just in general, having organizations understand where their AI is taking place and who's doing what, and more importantly, what identity are they actually operating under, uh, has been a big challenge in the industry and, uh, a big focus for us at CrowdStrike in, in trying to crack the code for our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says shadow AI has become a major issue for many companies.

“When I think about the, the adversaries, I, I call it the pyramid of pain. So if you just imagine the bottom part of the pyramid, the base of the pyramid is really, uh, what we call a hacktivist. So you've got the least level of sophistication, but the greatest number of adversaries. Then in the middle band of the pyramid, you've got e-crime, you know, more sophisticated, um, and a few less than all the hacktivists.”

Claim: George Kurtz describes hacktivists as the least sophisticated and most numerous category of adversaries.

“So you've got the least level of sophistication, but the greatest number of adversaries. Then in the middle band of the pyramid, you've got e-crime, you know, more sophisticated, um, and a few less than all the hacktivists.”

Claim: George Kurtz describes e-crime actors as more sophisticated than hacktivists but fewer in number.

“And then at the top of the pyramid, you've got nation state actors, right? So the most sophisticated, but the least number, relatively speaking. Well, that has been totally just blown up because really now what we're seeing is the new apex predator is the agent state.”

Claim: George Kurtz describes nation-state actors as the most sophisticated and relatively least numerous category of adversaries.

“Not the nation state, it's the agent state. And what the agent state has done, if we think about the, the models that are out there, um, that are ablated so there, there's no real guardrails, it's essentially taken all of these very complex topics and sort of techniques and costs and now flattened the entire pyramid.”

Claim: George Kurtz says models without meaningful guardrails have flattened the adversary pyramid by making complex topics, techniques, and costs more accessible.

“So what are we seeing? We're seeing more vulnerabilities found, and we're seeing faster attacks, and when the attacks come, it's just, you know, it's just one after another.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the current threat environment involves more vulnerabilities being found and faster, repeated attacks.

“You can see it. It's actually... Right now it's pretty clear whether it's an AI attack, um, because you can see how fast they're actually iterating. But at some point, they're gonna introduce that being low and slow, and it's gonna be more difficult to figure out what's AI and what isn't.”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that attackers will eventually make AI attacks low and slow, making them harder to distinguish from non-AI attacks.

“You can see it. It's actually... Right now it's pretty clear whether it's an AI attack, um, because you can see how fast they're actually iterating. But at some point, they're gonna introduce that being low and slow, and it's gonna be more difficult to figure out what's AI and what isn't.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI attacks are currently fairly easy to identify because they iterate visibly quickly.

“But that's what we're seeing, and I think that's one of the real challenges that organizations are facing, is just the barrage of attacks and the level of sophistication has dramatically increased.”

Claim: George Kurtz says organizations face a barrage of attacks and a dramatically increased level of attack sophistication.

“And ultimately, if, you know, if you give an agent a task with enough time and, you know, the agent nee- either needs to get in or it dies, it's gonna try to figure out a way to get in, and a lot of times it's gonna have success.”

Claim: George Kurtz says that if an agent is given enough time and must get in or die, it will try to find a way in and will often succeed.

“We're, we're seeing a lot of it on the open weight models, right? If you look at, I mean, just the guardrails on, on the latest generation of any of the frontier models, um, to be candid, you c- you can barely create a PowerPoint that has cybersecurity in it.”

Claim: CrowdStrike is seeing many adversarial attacks use open-weight AI models.

“We're, we're seeing a lot of it on the open weight models, right? If you look at, I mean, just the guardrails on, on the latest generation of any of the frontier models, um, to be candid, you c- you can barely create a PowerPoint that has cybersecurity in it.”

Claim: The guardrails on the latest frontier AI models can make it difficult to create a PowerPoint presentation about cybersecurity.

“I mean, it literally rejects you and bumps you down to a lower model. So what we've seen is, you know, again, if y- if you look at, um, GLM, if you look at, you know, uh, Quinn, if you look at any of the sort of models that are out there, uh, they've been very effective in being able to, um, deal with cybersecurity.”

Claim: A frontier model may reject a cybersecurity request and route the user to a lower-capability model.

“I mean, it literally rejects you and bumps you down to a lower model. So what we've seen is, you know, again, if y- if you look at, um, GLM, if you look at, you know, uh, Quinn, if you look at any of the sort of models that are out there, uh, they've been very effective in being able to, um, deal with cybersecurity.”

Claim: The speaker says that models such as GLM and Quinn have been very effective at handling cybersecurity tasks.

“And many of the, the models are either ablated or t- specifically built just for cyber. It might be for red teaming. And, and those are the type of attacks where you could actually just run these.”

Claim: Many AI models are ablated or purpose-built for cybersecurity, including red teaming.

“I mean, you can run them on... I've got two Spark DGXs at home and, you know, I've got all the models running and, you know, whatever I wanna do, I can do.”

Claim: The speaker says he has two Spark DGX systems at home running models and can use them to do whatever he wants.

“You wanna create ransomware? No problem. You wanna create a ransomware kit? No issue. Uh, you wanna deploy, you wanna iterate, I mean, it's all there for you, and, you know, that is, like, one step removed from just running it all on your, your laptop.”

Claim: The speaker says that locally runnable AI models can be used to create ransomware or ransomware kits, deploy them, and iterate on them.

“And we think about where Mac is today, even the new Macs, uh, that are coming out, right? The studios, they're gonna be incredible AI machines. So the tip of the spear is gonna be what you can run without the guardrails, and the, the frontier models are sort of helpful in, in terms of if you needed PowerShell scripts or those sort of things.”

Claim: Frontier AI models can help with tasks such as generating PowerShell scripts.

“And we think about where Mac is today, even the new Macs, uh, that are coming out, right? The studios, they're gonna be incredible AI machines. So the tip of the spear is gonna be what you can run without the guardrails, and the, the frontier models are sort of helpful in, in terms of if you needed PowerShell scripts or those sort of things.”

Claim: The speaker expects upcoming Mac Studio computers to be highly capable AI machines.

“And we think about where Mac is today, even the new Macs, uh, that are coming out, right? The studios, they're gonna be incredible AI machines. So the tip of the spear is gonna be what you can run without the guardrails, and the, the frontier models are sort of helpful in, in terms of if you needed PowerShell scripts or those sort of things.”

Claim: The speaker predicts that the most advanced offensive capabilities will come from models users can run without guardrails.

“But certainly, you can do a lot of it with the open-weight models right now.”

Claim: A lot of cybersecurity-related activity can currently be done with open-weight AI models.

“So, uh, but we've seen a lot of attacks. Uh, we've seen North Korea being very busy, uh, with these sort of attacks. Uh, they, they've got to, shall we say, get money into their economy, so they've been very busy on, uh, you know, stealing information, uh, a lot of it around ransomware and getting paid.”

Claim: The speaker says North Korea has been very active in cyberattacks involving information theft and ransomware for payment.

“But, um, yeah, I think overall what we've seen is a lot of, uh, we've seen obviously out of China a lot of activity using AI, and we've also seen it in the e-crime world where, um, when someone gets onto a system, we track breakout time.”

Claim: The speaker says China has been a source of substantial cyber activity using AI.

“But, um, yeah, I think overall what we've seen is a lot of, uh, we've seen obviously out of China a lot of activity using AI, and we've also seen it in the e-crime world where, um, when someone gets onto a system, we track breakout time. That is if, if, if they got onto your system, how long would it take them to actually break out and pivot and move to a different system? Uh, generally, the system they first land on is not the most interesting.”

Claim: CrowdStrike defines breakout time as the time an attacker takes after gaining access to a system to break out and move laterally to another system.

“That is if, if, if they got onto your system, how long would it take them to actually break out and pivot and move to a different system? Uh, generally, the system they first land on is not the most interesting. It could be, but it's not the most interesting. The crown jewels might be somewhere else. So on aver- That used to be days and, you know, hours, and now it's minutes.”

Claim: An attacker's initial system is generally not the most valuable target, because the crown jewels may be located elsewhere.

“It could be, but it's not the most interesting. The crown jewels might be somewhere else. So on aver- That used to be days and, you know, hours, and now it's minutes.”

Claim: The speaker says cyberattack breakout times have fallen from days or hours to minutes.

“Uh, on average it's twenty-nine minutes, but we've seen it as quick as twenty-seven seconds. And essentially, you know, now what we're looking at is the speed of inference. So as soon as they get on the machine, you can s- just see it r-iterating very quickly.”

Claim: The speaker reports an average cyberattack breakout time of 29 minutes and a fastest observed time of 27 seconds.

“And what people have to keep in mind is it- it's not malware anymore, it's prompts. So they can basically engineer prompts that would uniquely create, create a totally unique signature of what direction they're gonna go in, how they gather information, where they pivot, um, which makes it, you know, more challenging to figure all that out.”

Claim: The speaker says attackers increasingly use prompts rather than malware to generate unique activity patterns, making their information gathering and lateral movement more difficult to detect.

“But that- that's what we're seeing right now, and it- it's across the board from the nation state and e-crime actors for sure.”

Claim: The speaker says prompt-driven cyberattack activity is occurring among both nation-state and e-crime actors.

“Well, I think it's one of the most exciting times to be in technology. I mean, really, I've been doing this thirty-plus years, and you know, what I always like to say is that security parallels the slope of the technology curve.”

Claim: George Kurtz considers the current period one of the most exciting times to work in technology.

“Well, I think it's one of the most exciting times to be in technology. I mean, really, I've been doing this thirty-plus years, and you know, what I always like to say is that security parallels the slope of the technology curve.”

Claim: The speaker believes the development of security tracks the pace and trajectory of technological change.

“Well, I think it's one of the most exciting times to be in technology. I mean, really, I've been doing this thirty-plus years, and you know, what I always like to say is that security parallels the slope of the technology curve.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the development of security parallels the pace of technological change.

“When I first got into security, it was a Cisco router and, like, maybe a website barely, right? There, there really weren't firewalls. There were these toolkits, TIS toolkit, and these other things, probably dating myself, but, um, you know, there wasn't much there.”

Claim: When George Kurtz entered the security field, computing and security infrastructure was much less developed, with examples including a Cisco router, a basic website, and few firewalls.

“And now if you think about the complexity of where we are today with, with cloud, with, um, all of the other, uh, technologies around AI, I'm not gonna go through all of them, but it's a lot more complex today than it was way back then.”

Claim: The speaker says today's technology environment, including cloud and AI, is much more complex than when he began working in security.

“And now if you think about the complexity of where we are today with, with cloud, with, um, all of the other, uh, technologies around AI, I'm not gonna go through all of them, but it's a lot more complex today than it was way back then.”

Claim: George Kurtz says today's technology environment, including cloud and AI, is much more complex than it was when he entered security.

“So you need all these little companies and including big companies that are able to secure all these technologies. So when we think about where we are today, it actually is the most exciting, but it also creates the biggest opportunity because the adversaries generally find the gaps or the seams.”

Claim: The speaker says adversaries generally exploit gaps or seams in technology environments.

“So you need all these little companies and including big companies that are able to secure all these technologies. So when we think about where we are today, it actually is the most exciting, but it also creates the biggest opportunity because the adversaries generally find the gaps or the seams.”

Claim: George Kurtz says both small and large companies are needed to secure modern technologies.

“So you need all these little companies and including big companies that are able to secure all these technologies. So when we think about where we are today, it actually is the most exciting, but it also creates the biggest opportunity because the adversaries generally find the gaps or the seams.”

Claim: The speaker says that securing today's diverse technologies requires both small and large companies.

“So you need all these little companies and including big companies that are able to secure all these technologies. So when we think about where we are today, it actually is the most exciting, but it also creates the biggest opportunity because the adversaries generally find the gaps or the seams.”

Claim: George Kurtz says adversaries generally exploit gaps or seams in technology and its security.

“So they'll find new technologies that maybe, that they don't have good tech, uh, protection, um, that they're taking advantage of things like npm packages, right?”

Claim: The speaker says adversaries exploit new technologies with inadequate protection, including npm packages.

“So they'll find new technologies that maybe, that they don't have good tech, uh, protection, um, that they're taking advantage of things like npm packages, right?”

Claim: George Kurtz says adversaries exploit new technologies with inadequate protection, including npm packages.

“In the old world, a-as you, as you very well know, it was no one in corporate America would just download anything and run it on their computer. It had to be vetted and scanned and all these sort of things. And now we unleash an agent, we give it an identity, which is essentially our own or worse, and then we unleash it, and we say, "Do whatever you wanna do, and by the way, download whatever package you wanna download."”

Claim: The speaker says corporate America historically required software to be vetted and scanned rather than allowing users to download and run anything freely.

“In the old world, a-as you, as you very well know, it was no one in corporate America would just download anything and run it on their computer.”

Claim: George Kurtz says that in the past, corporate America did not allow people to download and run arbitrary software on their computers.

“It had to be vetted and scanned and all these sort of things. And now we unleash an agent, we give it an identity, which is essentially our own or worse, and then we unleash it, and we say, "Do whatever you wanna do, and by the way, download whatever package you wanna download."”

Claim: George Kurtz contrasts past software vetting and scanning with current practices in which agents receive an identity, potentially equivalent to or more powerful than a user's, and are allowed to act and download packages without comparable restrictions.

“It had to be vetted and scanned and all these sort of things. And now we unleash an agent, we give it an identity, which is essentially our own or worse, and then we unleash it, and we say, "Do whatever you wanna do, and by the way, download whatever package you wanna download."”

Claim: The speaker says organizations now give AI agents an identity—sometimes the user's own or a more privileged one—and allow them to download packages and act with broad discretion.

“And obviously, these are the kinda things that cause a tremendous amount of exposure. So we're, we're sorta getting to grips with-”

Claim: The speaker says that giving AI agents identities and broad freedom to download packages creates substantial security exposure.

“And obviously, these are the kinda things that cause a tremendous amount of exposure. So we're, we're sorta getting to grips with-”

Claim: George Kurtz says allowing agents to act and download packages freely creates substantial security exposure.

“No, they're not. I mean, y-you know, you, you see some of these things in the wild, and y-you're scratching your head, you shouldn't be surprised. I mean, it was like, "Let's give it a task, and we'll, we'll come back in a few days, and we'll hope it all worked."”

Claim: George Kurtz says people are not reading production code as it is generated.

“Nobody's watching it. Nobody understands what it's doing, uh, and it's problematic. So, you know, we can, we can talk about sort of the, uh, explainability of what these agents are doing, which is gonna be really important.”

Claim: George Kurtz says explainability of agent behavior will be very important.

“Nobody's watching it. Nobody understands what it's doing, uh, and it's problematic. So, you know, we can, we can talk about sort of the, uh, explainability of what these agents are doing, which is gonna be really important.”

Claim: George Kurtz says people often neither monitor agents nor understand their actions, which he considers problematic.

“Um, but it, it... Right now it's like a black box, and nobody knows what's going on. They hope, you know, something happens and pops out on the, on the other side of it. But it's, it's, it's a great time to be in technology.”

Claim: George Kurtz says that currently agent systems are black boxes whose internal activity is not understood by their users.

“AI is fundamentally gonna change the world, and the frontier labs are doing amazing things. But ultimately, it, it's gonna come down to security enabling these sort of technologies.”

Claim: George Kurtz considers the work of frontier AI labs impressive.

“AI is fundamentally gonna change the world, and the frontier labs are doing amazing things. But ultimately, it, it's gonna come down to security enabling these sort of technologies.”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that AI will fundamentally change the world.

“AI is fundamentally gonna change the world, and the frontier labs are doing amazing things. But ultimately, it, it's gonna come down to security enabling these sort of technologies.”

Claim: George Kurtz says security will ultimately enable the adoption and use of advanced technologies such as AI.

“And for the first time, security is the gas pedal, not the brake, and that's what we're seeing.”

Claim: George Kurtz says security has, for the first time, become an accelerator of technological adoption rather than an obstacle.

“All true. My biggest takeaway was that the defenders didn't have the same capabilities as the offense. Okay?”

Claim: George Kurtz's main takeaway from the Hugging Face incident was that defenders lacked capabilities comparable to those available to attackers.

“Now, you would look at this and say the airbags were off because this was an experiment where the agents, you know, the guardrails were down, the airbags were off, and ultimately they found a way out of the sandbox.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the Hugging Face experiment was conducted with guardrails disabled and that the agents ultimately escaped the sandbox.

“But the reality was Hugging Face, you know, when-- The first thing they did was they went to the frontier models, and they said, "What, like, is this thing real? What's going on?" And they got refused, right, because the airbags were not over there.”

Claim: George Kurtz says Hugging Face initially consulted frontier models about the incident, but those models refused to assist.

“So what did they have to do? They actually had to go to open weight models to kinda sift through all this data and figure it out. So a big piece for me is to, is to basically make sure that defenders have the same level of, of frontier defensive AI as, as what the offense is, i-is using.”

Claim: George Kurtz argues that defenders should have frontier-caliber defensive AI capabilities at the same level as those used by attackers.

“So what did they have to do? They actually had to go to open weight models to kinda sift through all this data and figure it out. So a big piece for me is to, is to basically make sure that defenders have the same level of, of frontier defensive AI as, as what the offense is, i-is using.”

Claim: George Kurtz says Hugging Face used open-weight models to analyze the data and understand the incident after frontier models refused to help.

“And that was a big takeaway, uh, for me and, and part of the things that, that CrowdStrike is working on.”

Claim: George Kurtz says providing defenders with frontier-level defensive AI is among the things CrowdStrike is working on.

“That's correct.”

Claim: George Kurtz agrees that strong guardrails on state-of-the-art lab models can limit the availability of comparable defensive capabilities to enterprises.

“Yeah, yeah. I mean, like you, you tr- you try to make a PowerPoint in, in-- with a frontier model a-around cybersecurity, and it refuses you. So, you know, this is part of why we created SafeMine and, and our, and our red and blue models just for that reason, because we wanted to give, uh, frontier caliber defenses, uh, to our customers that allow them to operate without sort of all these sort of refusals.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike created SafeMine and red and blue models to provide customers with frontier-caliber defensive capabilities without the refusals they encounter with other frontier models.

“Yeah, yeah. I mean, like you, you tr- you try to make a PowerPoint in, in-- with a frontier model a-around cybersecurity, and it refuses you. So, you know, this is part of why we created SafeMine and, and our, and our red and blue models just for that reason, because we wanted to give, uh, frontier caliber defenses, uh, to our customers that allow them to operate without sort of all these sort of refusals.”

Claim: George Kurtz says frontier models may refuse cybersecurity tasks, motivating CrowdStrike to create SafeMine and red and blue models for that purpose.

“Um, and, and I think that's gonna be an important element going forward for, for many companies.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects access to capable defensive AI without excessive refusals to be important for many companies in the future.

“I think, um, I guess back to the offense versus defense side, it seems like with every technology shift, offensive capabilities are, are always a little bit ahead when you have a big change in how things are done for a few reasons.”

Claim: SPEAKER_02 thinks offensive capabilities tend to lead defensive capabilities during major technology shifts.

“I mean, one of them is just with offense, it can be very directive. "I need to go do X," while with defense, it's a broad surface area you need to cover, so to some extent, you need to cover more stuff.”

Claim: Cyber offense can target a specific objective, while cyber defense must cover a broad surface area.

“And then secondly is just technology adoption and diffusion, right? You are one atta-- You are a set of attackers, you know what you're going after, versus the diffuse ecosystem of enterprises that you need to defend against.”

Claim: Attackers can focus on known targets, while defenders must protect a diffuse ecosystem of enterprises, making technology adoption and diffusion an additional challenge for defense.

“Well, this is one of the things that we focused on. Uh, we created our own cyber super intelligence labs before the term was, was popular, I might say. Um, so I guess we, we kinda nailed that one.”

Claim: CrowdStrike created its own cyber super intelligence labs before the term became popular.

“But essentially what we've done is we've created o-our own basically frontier stype-type lab that is totally focused on, uh, security models, both red and blue and the harness, and we call it SafeMine as a system, but we've got Red Tempest and Blue Solano.”

Claim: CrowdStrike created a frontier-style lab focused on red-team and blue-team security models and their harness, called the SafeMine system, with Red Tempest and Blue Solano.

“Those are the two models. Now, we worked extensively with NVIDIA on this, and, uh, we basically levered-- We leveraged a few model types, but Nemotron is one of the main models that we leverage on, on the blue side.”

Claim: CrowdStrike worked extensively with NVIDIA and uses several model types, with Nemotron among its main models for blue-team work.

“And when we sat down with them, and I sat down with Jensen, we were working on it for the last six months, and we kinda went through how this would work. And essentially, to your point, like, you know, the defense always seems to be one step behind.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 says that after six months of work, cyber defense still seems to be one step behind offense.

“So the big part of, of what we're doing is we're iterating the red and the blue. So for our customers, we have a view of what their environment looks like, and then, a-and this was Jensen sort of i-insisting, like, "You have to have a digital twin.”

Claim: CrowdStrike iterates its red-team and blue-team models and has a view of its customers’ environments.

“If you look at other industries, they have digital twins." And he goes, "You have to have one security." So we built a digital twin where we can take all of the information that we know about a customer's environment. We can basically recreate that in a virtual world, and then we can iterate the models and loop the models, where red continually is focused on getting in until it runs out of turns because blue Solano has actually figured out what red was doing.”

Claim: CrowdStrike built a digital twin that recreates a customer’s environment in a virtual world using information CrowdStrike has about that environment.

“We can basically recreate that in a virtual world, and then we can iterate the models and loop the models, where red continually is focused on getting in until it runs out of turns because blue Solano has actually figured out what red was doing.”

Claim: In CrowdStrike’s digital-twin environment, the red model repeatedly attempts to gain access until it runs out of turns because Blue Solano has identified its activity.

“And that's really the way I think we have to keep up with, uh, the threats, because red is constantly iterating, and you're gonna have to have this loop in place.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 believes continuous red-team and blue-team iteration is necessary to keep up with constantly evolving threats.

“Yeah, I think that's right. You know, we, we've really, you know, probably over the last, you know, four or five years, I guess, really moved into, you know, much broader platform capabilities.”

Claim: CrowdStrike has broadened its platform capabilities over approximately the past four to five years.

“We've got thirty-three modules today. And, you know, ultimately, when I started the company, we had one module, and now we've got thirty-three.”

Claim: CrowdStrike has 33 modules today, compared with one module when SPEAKER_00 started the company.

“We've got thirty-three modules today. And, you know, ultimately, when I started the company, we had one module, and now we've got thirty-three.”

Claim: CrowdStrike has grown from one module when George Kurtz started the company to thirty-three modules today.

“We've built capabilities not only across endpoint but around cloud, uh, IT, identity, um, and many different areas that are out there.”

Claim: CrowdStrike's capabilities span endpoint, cloud, IT, identity, and other areas.

“We've built capabilities not only across endpoint but around cloud, uh, IT, identity, um, and many different areas that are out there.”

Claim: CrowdStrike has built capabilities across endpoint security, cloud, IT, identity, and other areas.

“So if you look at where we've made a lot of investments in some of the things that we just talked about at our latest user conference, Falcone, um, it was around what we call AI DR. So we pioneered EDR, endpoint detection response, which a lot of it in the early days was a computer and a human.”

Claim: CrowdStrike says it pioneered endpoint detection and response (EDR), which initially involved a computer and a human.

“So if you look at where we've made a lot of investments in some of the things that we just talked about at our latest user conference, Falcone, um, it was around what we call AI DR. So we pioneered EDR, endpoint detection response, which a lot of it in the early days was a computer and a human.”

Claim: CrowdStrike pioneered endpoint detection and response (EDR), which initially involved a computer and a human.

“Um, and then, you know, we've added obviously many more things around that and prevention and all those sort of things. But when you look at what an agent is doing, it's, it's essentially a superhuman.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 characterizes an AI agent as essentially a superhuman.

“Um, and then, you know, we've added obviously many more things around that and prevention and all those sort of things. But when you look at what an agent is doing, it's, it's essentially a superhuman.”

Claim: George Kurtz characterizes an agent as essentially a superhuman.

“It has an identity. It has access to compute. It runs on your computer, uh, or it can run in a container. Um, it has access to data. It has networking capabilities, right?”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 says an AI agent has an identity, access to compute and data, can run on a computer or in a container, and has networking capabilities.

“It has an identity. It has access to compute. It runs on your computer, uh, or it can run in a container. Um, it has access to data. It has networking capabilities, right?”

Claim: An AI agent has an identity, access to compute and data, and networking capabilities, and can run on a computer or in a container.

“So what we wanted to be able to do is to first find all of this rogue and shadow AI 'cause nobody knew where it was. Like, back to your point, you gotta know what your environment looks like.”

Claim: CrowdStrike sought to discover rogue and shadow AI deployments because their locations were unknown.

“So what we wanted to be able to do is to first find all of this rogue and shadow AI 'cause nobody knew where it was. Like, back to your point, you gotta know what your environment looks like.”

Claim: CrowdStrike aimed to discover rogue and shadow AI because organizations did not know where it was operating.

“And then, two, we can instrument from the birth of an agent what that agent does. So if you're in, you know, Claude, Claude code, you start an agent.”

Claim: CrowdStrike can instrument an AI agent from its creation and monitor its activity.

“And then, two, we can instrument from the birth of an agent what that agent does. So if you're in, you know, Claude, Claude code, you start an agent.”

Claim: CrowdStrike can monitor an AI agent's activity from the moment the agent is created.

“It has sub-agents. It has tool calls. It, you know, goes to an MCP server. It pulls data. Whatever it's doing, we can actually tell you the entire chain of events, and that's incredibly important, and then be able to add policy and blocking rules around those.”

Claim: CrowdStrike can trace an AI agent's full activity chain—including sub-agents, tool calls, MCP server interactions, and data retrieval—and apply policies and blocking rules to it.

“It has sub-agents. It has tool calls. It, you know, goes to an MCP server. It pulls data. Whatever it's doing, we can actually tell you the entire chain of events, and that's incredibly important, and then be able to add policy and blocking rules around those.”

Claim: CrowdStrike can trace an agent’s full activity chain—including sub-agents, tool calls, MCP server access, and data retrieval—and apply policies and blocking rules to those activities.

“Um, so we've spent a lot of time in that area, and I think from a business perspective, it- If you look at the stats right now, on average today, which I actually think is low, but they say you can have ninety different agents, you know, as a, as an employee, um, well, that can be a much bigger opportunity than just EDR for us.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 says the reported average is 90 agents per employee today, but believes that estimate is low.

“Um, so we've spent a lot of time in that area, and I think from a business perspective, it- If you look at the stats right now, on average today, which I actually think is low, but they say you can have ninety different agents, you know, as a, as an employee, um, well, that can be a much bigger opportunity than just EDR for us.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes the reported average of ninety AI agents per employee is an underestimate.

“Um, so we've spent a lot of time in that area, and I think from a business perspective, it- If you look at the stats right now, on average today, which I actually think is low, but they say you can have ninety different agents, you know, as a, as an employee, um, well, that can be a much bigger opportunity than just EDR for us.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 believes managing AI agents could be a much larger business opportunity for CrowdStrike than EDR alone.

“Um, so we've spent a lot of time in that area, and I think from a business perspective, it- If you look at the stats right now, on average today, which I actually think is low, but they say you can have ninety different agents, you know, as a, as an employee, um, well, that can be a much bigger opportunity than just EDR for us.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes securing AI agents could represent a much larger business opportunity for CrowdStrike than EDR alone.

“So that's one area that we've been focused on. The, um, the second area then, as I mentioned, is creating this super intelligence lab and creating our own frontier models.”

Claim: CrowdStrike is investing in a super intelligence lab and developing its own frontier models.

“So that's one area that we've been focused on. The, um, the second area then, as I mentioned, is creating this super intelligence lab and creating our own frontier models.”

Claim: CrowdStrike is establishing a super intelligence lab to develop its own frontier models.

“Again, our models, we, we, we start with existing models like, uh, a Nemotron class, you know, mostly the three class of Nemotron.”

Claim: CrowdStrike’s models start from existing models, including models mostly from the Nemotron 3 class.

“Again, our models, we, we, we start with existing models like, uh, a Nemotron class, you know, mostly the three class of Nemotron.”

Claim: CrowdStrike bases its models on existing models, primarily models in the Nemotron 3 class.

“We're helping them sort of fine-tune some of the things we need for the force that's coming out. Um, but then, you know, we kind of, you know, post-train them and, and using all the valuable data that we have over the last fifteen years to get the best outcome.”

Claim: CrowdStrike is helping NVIDIA fine-tune models for its forthcoming force and post-trains models using data accumulated over 15 years.

“We're helping them sort of fine-tune some of the things we need for the force that's coming out. Um, but then, you know, we kind of, you know, post-train them and, and using all the valuable data that we have over the last fifteen years to get the best outcome.”

Claim: CrowdStrike is helping fine-tune models for its forthcoming force and post-trains them using data accumulated over roughly fifteen years.

“And I, uh, and I'll say one more thing and then I'll pause. The, the harness makes a huge difference. Like, almost any model we take, whether it's frontier, whether it's just an off-the-shelf, uh, open weight model, we can get much better results at a way lower cost because of the, the harness that we, we created that goes with it.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's harness can substantially improve results and reduce costs with almost any model, including frontier and off-the-shelf open-weight models.

“And I, uh, and I'll say one more thing and then I'll pause. The, the harness makes a huge difference. Like, almost any model we take, whether it's frontier, whether it's just an off-the-shelf, uh, open weight model, we can get much better results at a way lower cost because of the, the harness that we, we created that goes with it.”

Claim: SPEAKER_00 says CrowdStrike’s harness can produce much better results at much lower cost with almost any model, including frontier and off-the-shelf open-weight models.

“Our models will be significantly cheaper. So just to give you an example, um, so for a general remediation, if you use like, uh, uh, uh, the highest caliber frontier cyber model, it'd probably cost you about ten dollars. Ours is like three cents. So there is a huge cost difference, um, which is important. But then when you look at, you know, our model be- because of the way we've post-trained it on our data, a huge difference is we have the data.”

Claim: For general remediation, George Kurtz says a high-caliber frontier cybersecurity model would probably cost about $10, while CrowdStrike's model costs about $0.03, making CrowdStrike's model significantly cheaper.

“Our models will be significantly cheaper. So just to give you an example, um, so for a general remediation, if you use like, uh, uh, uh, the highest caliber frontier cyber model, it'd probably cost you about ten dollars.”

Claim: A general remediation task using a highest-caliber frontier cybersecurity model would probably cost about $10.

“Our models will be significantly cheaper. So just to give you an example, um, so for a general remediation, if you use like, uh, uh, uh, the highest caliber frontier cyber model, it'd probably cost you about ten dollars.”

Claim: CrowdStrike's models will cost significantly less than frontier models.

“Ours is like three cents. So there is a huge cost difference, um, which is important. But then when you look at, you know, our model be- because of the way we've post-trained it on our data, a huge difference is we have the data.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's model is post-trained on CrowdStrike's security data, which he identifies as a major differentiator.

“Ours is like three cents. So there is a huge cost difference, um, which is important. But then when you look at, you know, our model be- because of the way we've post-trained it on our data, a huge difference is we have the data.”

Claim: George Kurtz attributes an advantage of CrowdStrike's post-trained model to the company's access to its own data.

“Ours is like three cents. So there is a huge cost difference, um, which is important. But then when you look at, you know, our model be- because of the way we've post-trained it on our data, a huge difference is we have the data.”

Claim: For a general remediation task, CrowdStrike's model costs about $0.03, compared with about $10 for a highest-caliber frontier cybersecurity model.

“Like, there is no Reddit of CrowdStrike security data. You can create synthetic data, but it's, it's really not the same as what we have. We got fifteen years, uh, well, maybe a little bit less because I started fifteen years ago, but, you know, call it over a decade of security data, including from our MDR, our Managed Detection Response service, that has all of the sort of threat and, and vulnerability pairings and sort of the attack chains, and we've basically created this massive amount of data that we use to train it.”

Claim: CrowdStrike has accumulated over a decade of security data—including MDR threat-vulnerability pairings and attack chains—and uses it to train its models.

“Like, there is no Reddit of CrowdStrike security data. You can create synthetic data, but it's, it's really not the same as what we have. We got fifteen years, uh, well, maybe a little bit less because I started fifteen years ago, but, you know, call it over a decade of security data, including from our MDR, our Managed Detection Response service, that has all of the sort of threat and, and vulnerability pairings and sort of the attack chains, and we've basically created this massive amount of data that we use to train it.”

Claim: George Kurtz says no public Reddit-like source contains CrowdStrike's security data and that synthetic data is not equivalent to that data.

“Like, there is no Reddit of CrowdStrike security data. You can create synthetic data, but it's, it's really not the same as what we have. We got fifteen years, uh, well, maybe a little bit less because I started fifteen years ago, but, you know, call it over a decade of security data, including from our MDR, our Managed Detection Response service, that has all of the sort of threat and, and vulnerability pairings and sort of the attack chains, and we've basically created this massive amount of data that we use to train it.”

Claim: George Kurtz says there is no Reddit-like repository of CrowdStrike security data and that synthetic data is not equivalent to CrowdStrike's data.

“Like, there is no Reddit of CrowdStrike security data. You can create synthetic data, but it's, it's really not the same as what we have. We got fifteen years, uh, well, maybe a little bit less because I started fifteen years ago, but, you know, call it over a decade of security data, including from our MDR, our Managed Detection Response service, that has all of the sort of threat and, and vulnerability pairings and sort of the attack chains, and we've basically created this massive amount of data that we use to train it.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike has over a decade of security data, including Managed Detection Response data containing threat-vulnerability pairings and attack chains, which the company uses to train its model.

“So we g- we're getting great results on it, and, um, I think it is very focused b- because of the post-training. You know, again, it's not gonna cure cancer, but it's gonna give you great results for security.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's post-trained model is focused on security and is producing strong results, though it is not intended to cure cancer.

“So we g- we're getting great results on it, and, um, I think it is very focused b- because of the post-training. You know, again, it's not gonna cure cancer, but it's gonna give you great results for security.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's post-trained model is focused on security and is producing great results, though it is not intended to cure cancer.

“That's number one. Number two is there is a safety and trust aspect. We have all of the data from our customers. We've been entrusted with that for the last fifteen years.”

Claim: CrowdStrike says its customers have entrusted it with their data for fifteen years.

“That's number one. Number two is there is a safety and trust aspect. We have all of the data from our customers. We've been entrusted with that for the last fifteen years.”

Claim: George Kurtz says customers have entrusted CrowdStrike with their data for the past fifteen years.

“We know how to protect it. We know what they want. We know how they wanna use it. We-- They-- There, there's a real concern by customers. They don't want all this data going out to the labs.”

Claim: CrowdStrike says its customers are concerned about sending all their data to AI labs and do not want that to happen.

“We know how to protect it. We know what they want. We know how they wanna use it. We-- They-- There, there's a real concern by customers. They don't want all this data going out to the labs. They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it, their information being trained on, right? So we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want, um, for, for their own security program, and this, this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike customers are concerned about sending their data to AI labs and do not want their sensitive information used to train models.

“We know how to protect it. We know what they want. We know how they wanna use it. We-- They-- There, there's a real concern by customers. They don't want all this data going out to the labs.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike knows how to protect customer data and understands customers' needs and intended uses for that data.

“We know how to protect it. We know what they want. We know how they wanna use it. We-- They-- There, there's a real concern by customers. They don't want all this data going out to the labs.”

Claim: CrowdStrike says it knows how to protect customer data and understands customers' needs and intended uses of that data.

“They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it, their information being trained on, right? So we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want, um, for, for their own security program, and this, this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI sovereignty is very important to many CrowdStrike customers.

“They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it, their information being trained on, right? So we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want, um, for, for their own security program, and this, this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers.”

Claim: CrowdStrike says customers do not want their sensitive information sent to AI labs or used for model training.

“They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it, their information being trained on, right? So we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want, um, for, for their own security program, and this, this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike can provide the trust and security customers seek for their security programs.

“They don't want all their sensitive information. They don't want it, their information being trained on, right? So we can provide a way to get them the trust and security that they want, um, for, for their own security program, and this, this sort of concept of AI sovereignty is very important to many of our customers.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike can provide the trust and security customers want for their security programs, and that AI sovereignty matters to many of its customers.

“So again, we're not saying exclude the labs because they have incredible technology, but you can pick what you want or you can route between, you know, the various models.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike does not advocate excluding AI labs and wants customers to be able to choose models or route requests among them.

“So again, we're not saying exclude the labs because they have incredible technology, but you can pick what you want or you can route between, you know, the various models.”

Claim: George Kurtz does not advocate excluding AI labs, which he says have incredible technology.

“So again, we're not saying exclude the labs because they have incredible technology, but you can pick what you want or you can route between, you know, the various models.”

Claim: CrowdStrike lets customers choose models or route requests among different models.

“But ultimately, we wanna give customers choice.”

Claim: CrowdStrike's goal is to give customers choice among AI models and deployment options.

“But ultimately, we wanna give customers choice.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's ultimate goal is to give customers choice.

“I think the number one factor in security is, is, is being trusted, being a trusted partner. You know, you can look at the vendors out there. There's, there's obviously a few big guys that are, that are out there.”

Claim: George Kurtz says trust and being a trusted partner are the most important factors in security.

“There's many security companies. But, uh, trust is, is, uh, built in drips and lost in buckets and, you know, cu- customers, they, they don't want sort of cowboy activities that may put their, their data at risk.”

Claim: George Kurtz says trust is built gradually but can be lost quickly, and customers do not want reckless activities that could endanger their data.

“And, um, you, you know, again, I know everybody's do- trying to do the best they can, but I... Our whole focus, right? And I think focus is incredibly important in any business.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes focus is extremely important in any business.

“Our whole focus is security, and our whole focus is keeping our customers safe, and we're not, we're not trying to solve the world's problems in, in AI and other areas. So I think that is, is certainly an advantage for us.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike focuses on security and customer safety rather than trying to solve broader problems in AI and other fields, and he considers that focus an advantage.

“Certainly within two years you're gonna have local models that are all running on people's computers. Um, you know, you may have a mixture of local models plus sort of last mile routing into, into frontiers in terms of what they look like.”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that within two years, local AI models will run on people's computers.

“Certainly within two years you're gonna have local models that are all running on people's computers. Um, you know, you may have a mixture of local models plus sort of last mile routing into, into frontiers in terms of what they look like.”

Claim: George Kurtz says people may use a combination of local AI models and last-mile routing to frontier models.

“You're gonna have a lot more open weight models. Um, you know, you can just see the shift in the tokens, you know, over the last six months.”

Claim: George Kurtz says token usage has shifted over the preceding six months.

“You're gonna have a lot more open weight models. Um, you know, you can just see the shift in the tokens, you know, over the last six months.”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that open-weight models will become much more common.

“I talk to CIOs, you know, almost every day. I had dinner with one tonight, uh, from big bank in New York and, and basically the comment is, you know, we, we, we got into AI, we went all in, great.”

Claim: George Kurtz says he speaks with CIOs almost daily and had dinner that evening with a CIO from a large New York bank.

“I talk to CIOs, you know, almost every day. I had dinner with one tonight, uh, from big bank in New York and, and basically the comment is, you know, we, we, we got into AI, we went all in, great. The costs were out of control. You know, token maxing, you know, stopped when people got big bills. And, you know, I said, "Well, what, how do you think about this?”

Claim: George Kurtz recounts a bank executive saying the bank adopted AI extensively, but uncontrolled costs and large bills caused its token-maxing to stop.

“I talk to CIOs, you know, almost every day. I had dinner with one tonight, uh, from big bank in New York and, and basically the comment is, you know, we, we, we got into AI, we went all in, great. The costs were out of control. You know, token maxing, you know, stopped when people got big bills. And, you know, I said, "Well, what, how do you think about this?”

Claim: CIOs have told George Kurtz that AI costs became uncontrollable and that they stopped maximizing token usage after receiving large bills.

“Like, what are you gonna do?" And they said, "The models are so-- the open-weight models right now are so good, even if they're three months behind, it's plenty for what we need."”

Claim: A bank customer told George Kurtz that open-weight models could meet its needs even if they lagged frontier models by three months.

“Like, what are you gonna do?" And they said, "The models are so-- the open-weight models right now are so good, even if they're three months behind, it's plenty for what we need."”

Claim: George Kurtz reports that a bank executive considered current open-weight models sufficient for the bank's needs despite being three months behind.

“And one of the customer's comments, and, and they know I-I'm into Formula 1, they said, "Any Formula 1 activity that we need for the bank will go to the frontier.”

Claim: George Kurtz recounts a customer saying the bank would use frontier models for its Formula 1-related activity.

“Like, if it's alpha and we're making money and it's like, you know, super important, we'll pay the money, not, no big deal. But for all the other things, like, it's really expensive, and we're gonna create all of our own open-weight models, you know, and do more post-training on them and those sort of things," that that's the way they're gonna operate.”

Claim: George Kurtz reports that a bank customer would pay for frontier models for highly important, profit-generating work, but use its own open-weight models for other tasks because frontier models are expensive.

“Like, if it's alpha and we're making money and it's like, you know, super important, we'll pay the money, not, no big deal. But for all the other things, like, it's really expensive, and we're gonna create all of our own open-weight models, you know, and do more post-training on them and those sort of things," that that's the way they're gonna operate.”

Claim: A bank customer said it would create its own open-weight models and perform additional post-training for uses that did not warrant frontier-model spending.

“Like, if it's alpha and we're making money and it's like, you know, super important, we'll pay the money, not, no big deal. But for all the other things, like, it's really expensive, and we're gonna create all of our own open-weight models, you know, and do more post-training on them and those sort of things," that that's the way they're gonna operate.”

Claim: A bank customer said it would pay for frontier models when the use case could generate alpha and was especially important.

“Like, if it's alpha and we're making money and it's like, you know, super important, we'll pay the money, not, no big deal. But for all the other things, like, it's really expensive, and we're gonna create all of our own open-weight models, you know, and do more post-training on them and those sort of things," that that's the way they're gonna operate.”

Claim: George Kurtz reports that a bank customer planned to create its own open-weight models and post-train them further.

“And I firmly believe that. I'm seeing that in customer after customer, that that's, that's, that's the way they're gonna go. And I think, you know, part of some of the challenges in the current environment is I think people are, are all seeing that and, you know, there, there is some concern, you know, at the frontier level of, of what's gonna take place.”

Claim: George Kurtz firmly believes customers will reserve frontier models for selected high-value work and use open-weight models for other tasks, saying he sees this pattern repeatedly among customers.

“And I firmly believe that. I'm seeing that in customer after customer, that that's, that's, that's the way they're gonna go. And I think, you know, part of some of the challenges in the current environment is I think people are, are all seeing that and, you know, there, there is some concern, you know, at the frontier level of, of what's gonna take place.”

Claim: George Kurtz says the shift toward selective frontier-model use and customer-built open-weight models is creating concern among frontier-level players.

“And I firmly believe that. I'm seeing that in customer after customer, that that's, that's, that's the way they're gonna go. And I think, you know, part of some of the challenges in the current environment is I think people are, are all seeing that and, you know, there, there is some concern, you know, at the frontier level of, of what's gonna take place.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes customers will use frontier models selectively for high-value needs and rely on their own open-weight models for other uses.

“And I firmly believe that. I'm seeing that in customer after customer, that that's, that's, that's the way they're gonna go. And I think, you know, part of some of the challenges in the current environment is I think people are, are all seeing that and, you know, there, there is some concern, you know, at the frontier level of, of what's gonna take place.”

Claim: George Kurtz says there is concern among frontier-level AI players about what will happen as customers increasingly adopt the described model-use pattern.

“So I think it, it, it is what it is, but the, the, the labs certainly are focused on, on trying to prevent distillation. And, and obviously, you know, when you look at the Chinese models that are out there, there's a lot of distillation takes. There's factories of systems that are, you know, bouncing all over the internet distilling this. I, I think the challenge is the, the genie's out of the bottle. I mean, there, there's a lot of distillation's already taken place.”

Claim: George Kurtz says frontier labs are trying to prevent model distillation, but substantial distillation has already taken place, including involving Chinese models.

“There's factories of systems that are, you know, bouncing all over the internet distilling this. I, I think the challenge is the, the genie's out of the bottle. I mean, there, there's a lot of distillation's already taken place.”

Claim: George Kurtz says factories of systems are operating across the internet to distill models.

“The models are very good. But we also have to give credit where it's due. If, if you don't have all the chips and you have to be resourceful, and you still wanna have top models, you know, I think there's some innovative things that are taking place outside of the US, and we've gotta be mindful of that, right?”

Claim: George Kurtz says developers with limited access to chips can use resourcefulness to produce top models, and that innovative AI work is occurring outside the United States.

“The models are very good. But we also have to give credit where it's due. If, if you don't have all the chips and you have to be resourceful, and you still wanna have top models, you know, I think there's some innovative things that are taking place outside of the US, and we've gotta be mindful of that, right? Um, so yes, it's hard. I, I think it's gonna be hard to put the genie back in the bottle on distillation. They, they're gonna do the best they can, but, um, you know, a lot of the models are, are...”

Claim: George Kurtz believes it will be difficult to reverse or stop model distillation.

“You know, I, I think now, you know, what does it look like in two years? I don't know. You, you've got great models today. They, they can last for a while, and you have a lot of data that's already packed into them.”

Claim: George Kurtz says current AI models are very good, may remain useful for a while, and already contain substantial data.

“You know, I, I think now, you know, what does it look like in two years? I don't know. You, you've got great models today. They, they can last for a while, and you have a lot of data that's already packed into them. So we'll, we'll see how it unfolds. I, I wish I had the crystal ball on that one.”

Claim: George Kurtz is uncertain about what model distillation will look like in two years.

“Well, there are some open-weight models coming out. I'm, I'm sure you, you know, you may be invested in them as well. Um, I, I think having great US open-weight models is gonna be very important.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes it will be very important for the United States to have high-quality open-weight AI models.

“So, you know, one of the reasons why we worked with, with NVIDIA was, of course, Nemotron is open weight and open source, not just open weight. But having other alternatives is gonna be very important.”

Claim: George Kurtz says NVIDIA's Nemotron is both open-weight and open-source, and that having alternative models will be very important.

“And I think there's... You know, again, just being in technology long enough, you kinda look at how things unfold. Like, the, the operating system of the Internet is Linux, like period, okay?”

Claim: George Kurtz describes Linux as the operating system of the internet.

“And there's a reason for that, and there's gonna be an operating system of AI, and it's pro-- in my mind, it's gonna be, you know, an open source, open weight.”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that AI will have an operating system and believes it will be open-source and open-weight.

“When that happens and how it all unfolds, I mean, we'll see. And it doesn't mean there isn't room for any frontier model. It doesn't mean that people are not gonna make a bunch of money off it.”

Claim: George Kurtz says an open-source, open-weight AI operating system would not eliminate the role of frontier models or the possibility of earning substantial money from them.

“You know, the application stack sort of around it, um, you know, the harnesses and how things are connected and how you think about enterprise, all those sort of things are gonna be really important.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes the AI application stack—including harnesses, system connections, and enterprise integration—will be very important.

“But ultimately, like, there's just too much cost involved right now. And, and when you look at a lot of the, these frontier models, I mean, they're being commoditized.”

Claim: George Kurtz says frontier AI models currently involve excessive costs and are becoming commoditized.

“If the Chinese models are three months behind, you know, a lot of companies are going like, "Three months is n-- what, what is, what am I gonna get out of it? Three... I-- It does everything I want." And that's the challenge.”

Claim: George Kurtz says many companies see little benefit in using a frontier model over a Chinese model that is three months behind when the latter already meets their needs.

“... to, to some degree. Um, I, I think open is here to stay as a big part of the puzzle. Uh, you know, one, one question. I, I know we're gonna keep asking you to look into the future, and it's kind of impossible, but given your history in, in security, this is the first time in my career in technology where some very, uh, smart, well-educated technologists are like, "We need to turn the internet off.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes open-source technology will remain a major part of the AI landscape.

“I mean, I think it's nonsense, you know? Uh, it, like, is security and, and what agents can do and, and the risks that they pose, is that serious? Of course. That's serious business. We should all look at that and go, "Yeah, we gotta make sure that we lock things down," you know? But is the world gonna end because of these agents anytime soon?”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI-agent security risks are serious and systems should be secured against them.

“Of course. That's serious business. We should all look at that and go, "Yeah, we gotta make sure that we lock things down," you know? But is the world gonna end because of these agents anytime soon? No. And when you look at what the agents are doing, I, I think there's this sort of mythical view of what an agent does. Like, an agent doesn't just beam itself from your computer to another computer.”

Claim: George Kurtz does not expect AI agents to cause the end of the world anytime soon.

“No. And when you look at what the agents are doing, I, I think there's this sort of mythical view of what an agent does. Like, an agent doesn't just beam itself from your computer to another computer. It actually just does the same thing a human would do, just better and faster, right? So if you think about what companies like CrowdStrike have done for a long time, it-- we prevent against these sort of attacks.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI agents do not independently teleport between computers; they carry out the same kinds of actions humans do, but better and faster.

“Now, they might come faster. There might be, you know, more lower-level sort of vulnerabilities chained together and those sort of things. Great, um, you know, great for the adversary, not great for the defender.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI-enabled attacks may occur faster and may combine more low-level vulnerabilities, which benefits adversaries rather than defenders.

“But it's building the technology that, um, can deal with all these sort of attacks. So what has AI done? It's created more vulnerability, so you have more of them. And, you know, you have more exploitation coming faster. So it's more and faster. But it-- there isn't, like, a unique class that all of a sudden an agent just beams itself somewhere.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI has increased the number of vulnerabilities and made exploitation more frequent and faster.

“And I think people just get wrapped around the axle of, like, there's some new class of technique that's taking... There, there isn't. It's just been trained on what we know. It hasn't developed its own yet.”

Claim: George Kurtz says AI agents have not yet developed their own new techniques and have instead been trained on existing knowledge.

“And that's why I kinda look at it and go, security, again, is gonna be an enabler for AI, which I think is incredibly important for the security industry.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes security will enable AI adoption.

“'Cause normally it's, you know, you're putting the brakes on, you know, we have to take time. You're not letting the business run as fast as they want. And now everyone's coming to, to CrowdStrike and, and others going, "Well, how do you make AI secure so we can go faster in AI?"”

Claim: George Kurtz says businesses are asking CrowdStrike and other security providers how to secure AI in order to accelerate their AI adoption.

“So that, that's the way I would look at it. Like, A-AI is here to stay. I think some of the, the, the concern is there, and it should be there, but sort of, like, there's a lot of, um, uh, kinda doomerism around some of this stuff, and I, I just don't think it's, it's necessarily warranted.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes AI is here to stay and that some concern is appropriate, but some AI doomerism is not necessarily warranted.

“I think, you know, chips used to be kind of not in fashion. Obviously, we, we know they are in fashion today, and you're only gonna need more of them and faster of them and, and more specialized.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects demand for chips to grow, including demand for greater quantities, faster chips, and more specialized chips.

“And I, I do think there will be some big breakthroughs in the chip world. You know, when we think about just sort of the speed, just take, you know, Moore's law might be a bit data, but... dated, but at the end of the day, you know, they, they, the chips came out, and things just got faster and cheaper.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects major breakthroughs in chip technology.

“I don't know the trajectory, but I can guarantee you it's gonna be faster and cheaper in the future. Like, that I, I can see. So as these specialized chips are developed that, you know, focus in maybe s- particular areas, as new science is developed around the mathematics, um, you know, there can be step function increases in performance, you know, uh, less power, those sort of things.”

Claim: George Kurtz says specialized chips and advances in mathematics could yield step-function performance gains and lower power consumption.

“I don't know the trajectory, but I can guarantee you it's gonna be faster and cheaper in the future. Like, that I, I can see. So as these specialized chips are developed that, you know, focus in maybe s- particular areas, as new science is developed around the mathematics, um, you know, there can be step function increases in performance, you know, uh, less power, those sort of things.”

Claim: George Kurtz says chips will become faster and cheaper in the future, while acknowledging that he does not know the trajectory.

“So I think chips is a big one. The, the open weight models, um, I think there's a lot of room to grow, certainly the US models.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes open-weight models, especially US models, have substantial room for further development.

“And I do think there's gonna be a lot of advancements in taking these models and shrinking them down, you know, and, and, and being able to run them on your phone as an example.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects advances in model compression that will enable AI models to run on phones.

“Like, y- we have more power in our iPhone today than, than they had in the entire room. So that's gonna come, and I think the area where you can make AI faster, cheaper, more efficient, and, and you bring it to the desktop, and you bring it to the, the, the phone where a- you're, you're doing it at the edge.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects AI to become faster, cheaper, and more efficient, enabling it to run on desktops and phones at the edge.

“I think all of those are sort of exciting opportunities because that's really where I see... You know, you're, you're probably gonna have a hybrid model, but you can do a lot of it now locally.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects AI deployment to use a hybrid model, with a substantial amount of processing performed locally.

“And again, just looking at the, um, you know, the TPUs, MPUs, et cetera, like, these are... They're, they're all on systems that we have today, and, and a lot of times are going to waste. But I, I don't think they're gonna be going to waste that, that much longer.”

Claim: George Kurtz says TPUs, MPUs, and similar processors are already in many systems but often go unused, and he expects that to change soon.

“Just because it is, you know, your job to think ambitiously about what the defenders can do all day, uh, I, I wouldn't say, like, AI def-- uh, sorry, defenders, security defenders are, uh, doomers in that specific term, but they're, like, generally kind of dour and, like, pretty pessimistic about the, um, cat and mouse game getting any better in their favor.”

Claim: Security defenders are generally pessimistic about the prospect that the cybersecurity cat-and-mouse game will shift in their favor.

“I think it can be because if we, again, just with, with the concepts that, uh, you know, are... They're, they're not necessarily new or unique, but the, the, the ability to always rapidly understand what the offense is doing and making sure that your defense is, keeps up with it is, is gonna be the key.”

Claim: Cybersecurity defense can become dominant if defenders rapidly understand offensive activity and ensure their defenses keep pace with it.

“I mean, it, it, it's sort of the, the modern-day version of the, the Hacking Exposed book that, that I co-authored many years ago, which was, like, if you show people how the offense works, the defense is gonna be a lot better.”

Claim: The speaker co-authored Hacking Exposed, a book intended to improve defense by showing people how offensive hacking works.

“Now, that was a much slower sort of tempo than it is today, but I think that's gonna be important. And as an industry, making sure... This is a key thing for us, and, and I really drill this home with, with our, our team at CrowdStrike, is you've got to give as good or better capabilities to the defender than what the offense has.”

Claim: Cybersecurity now moves at a much faster tempo than it did when Hacking Exposed was written.

“Now, that was a much slower sort of tempo than it is today, but I think that's gonna be important. And as an industry, making sure... This is a key thing for us, and, and I really drill this home with, with our, our team at CrowdStrike, is you've got to give as good or better capabilities to the defender than what the offense has.”

Claim: The cybersecurity industry must provide defenders with capabilities at least as good as those available to attackers.

“And if you're just slightly better, you know, just mathematically, you're still gonna have an advantage. And I think, uh, it's, again, it's always gonna be a cat and mouse game, but being really smart about it is gonna be important.”

Claim: Defenders retain an advantage if they are even slightly better than attackers.

“And if you're just slightly better, you know, just mathematically, you're still gonna have an advantage. And I think, uh, it's, again, it's always gonna be a cat and mouse game, but being really smart about it is gonna be important.”

Claim: Cybersecurity will remain a cat-and-mouse game, making strategic intelligence important.

“The only way to fight AI today is with better AI. And, you know, you, you've, you've gotta u-use the advantages you have.”

Claim: The only way to fight AI-driven threats today is to use better AI.

“The defender knows their own systems. The defender has the architectural diagrams. The defender has the code, right? So how do you put all of that into something that you can dramatically increase your probability of outsmarting the offensive AI?”

Claim: Defenders have knowledge of their own systems, including their architectural diagrams and source code.

“The only tactical thing I, I think is an interesting idea is the idea that, um, you could over time If, if it is going to be mostly agent-written code, you could enforce better security architecture, um, and, you know, perhaps fewer vulnerabilities or a lot of people where, you know, formal verification has always been enormously niche, right?”

Claim: Formal verification has historically been used only in a very niche way.

“The only tactical thing I, I think is an interesting idea is the idea that, um, you could over time If, if it is going to be mostly agent-written code, you could enforce better security architecture, um, and, you know, perhaps fewer vulnerabilities or a lot of people where, you know, formal verification has always been enormously niche, right?”

Claim: If agents write most software, they could enable enforcement of better security architecture over time and perhaps reduce vulnerabilities.

“But even, even short of that, like, okay, why is all the software insecure? Because, you know, one, one big reason is that engineers are, um, you know, there's a limited number of them with limited capacity, and we're all trying to move very quickly.”

Claim: A major reason software is insecure is that a limited number of engineers with limited capacity are under pressure to move quickly.

“But if you can scale at the speed of compute or your willingness to spend, and agents have infinite patience, like maybe we could actually end up with more secure software over time.”

Claim: If software development scales with compute or spending and agents have effectively unlimited patience, software might become more secure over time.

“Well, you just created it. Like, why didn't you just do that in, in the first part? You know, maybe there's some optimization, but I think, um, what people don't necessarily realize, uh, is that even with, with zero vulnerabilities, which I hope the industry can get there, you're still gonna have breaches.”

Claim: Even if the industry achieves zero software vulnerabilities, breaches will still occur.

“'Cause a lot of what we see people today doing is they're not necessarily breaking in, they're logging in. There's such an issue around identity. But at the end of the day, if we can get better code, and we can have less vulnerabilities, and we can ripple that through, that'll be great.”

Claim: Many contemporary cyber incidents involve people logging in rather than breaking into systems, making identity a major security issue.

“'Cause a lot of what we see people today doing is they're not necessarily breaking in, they're logging in. There's such an issue around identity. But at the end of the day, if we can get better code, and we can have less vulnerabilities, and we can ripple that through, that'll be great.”

Claim: Improving code quality and reducing vulnerabilities across the software ecosystem would be beneficial.

“The, the challenge is it's such a long tail. You take Microsoft as an example. Just because of, of all of the, the, um, you know, compatibility that they wanna maintain going backwards, backward compatibility, you know, there's things that never kinda get fixed or, or modernized and, you know, that's just one important element in our ecosystem, but think about all the other software that's out there. You're not gonna just fix it all overnight, so it's gonna be a really long tail.”

Claim: Because the software ecosystem has a long tail, fixing all of its software will take a long time rather than happening overnight.

“The, the challenge is it's such a long tail. You take Microsoft as an example. Just because of, of all of the, the, um, you know, compatibility that they wanna maintain going backwards, backward compatibility, you know, there's things that never kinda get fixed or, or modernized and, you know, that's just one important element in our ecosystem, but think about all the other software that's out there.”

Claim: Microsoft's effort to maintain backward compatibility means some software issues are never fixed or modernized.

“Yeah. Hap- happy to jump into that. So first, I think you have to recognize it's a different operating model and cadence. You know, we, we've got thousands and thousands of people, right? And when you think about some of the AI native companies that just started, they have a handful of people. You know, Claude is running all day. They've got agents doing all kinds of stuff.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes large companies need a different operating model and cadence from small AI-native companies.

“Like that's the, that's the new world, which is great, but you, you can't be in a, uh... not that we are, but you can't be in like the waterfall mentality of development, like things pop out a year later.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes companies cannot rely on waterfall development cycles that take a year to produce results.

“Like you're gonna be out of business. So I think you first have to realize that having these massive teams and these long schedules, like that is not gonna cut it.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes massive teams and long development schedules will not be sufficient for companies to compete.

“So having smaller teams that are, you know, squads or, you know, smaller groups that are focused on a problem, they can leverage AI.”

Claim: George Kurtz says small, problem-focused teams can use AI.

“But you can't have like thousands of people show up to solve a problem. You gotta have a smaller team to be able to do that, and we've done that. We've done that with like our Falcon Guardian product.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike uses smaller teams rather than thousands of people to solve problems, including for its Falcon Guardian product.

“And to your point, like I was personally involved, you know, had three-day-a-week meetings. I was involved in the design of it. It's like here's what we're doing, like change this, change that, and you gotta get back to your like startup roots because it, it, it takes that level of change, you know, in a, in a bigger company.”

Claim: George Kurtz says he personally helped design Falcon Guardian and participated in meetings about it three days a week.

“And to your point, like I was personally involved, you know, had three-day-a-week meetings. I was involved in the design of it. It's like here's what we're doing, like change this, change that, and you gotta get back to your like startup roots because it, it, it takes that level of change, you know, in a, in a bigger company.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes larger companies need startup-like speed and change to adapt.

“And there are many companies that are much bigger than we are and, you know, you just can't be slow and plodding. So that's number one is to realize that the operating model and cadence is changing, and you gotta change with- you gotta disrupt yourself internally.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes companies must adapt their operating model and cadence and disrupt themselves internally instead of operating slowly.

“And then you just have to look at, like what, well, what are your moats? Like if you're a system of record, it's a pretty big moat. We're, we're a security system of record, right?”

Claim: George Kurtz believes being a system of record can provide a substantial competitive moat.

“And then you just have to look at, like what, well, what are your moats? Like if you're a system of record, it's a pretty big moat. We're, we're a security system of record, right? And we have everyone's data for many years. And by the way, we're net data creators. Our, our sensors, we call them security agents, right? But I mean like not to be confused with AI agents.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike is a security system of record with customers' data accumulated over many years.

“But the software that, that endpoint engines, right? That is a net data creator, so we're creating seven trillion or so events like, uh, a day.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike's endpoint software generates approximately seven trillion events each day.

“And if you're constantly creating this new data stream, that is gonna give you an advantage because what's the lifeblood of any AI system is the data that you feed into it.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes continuously generating new data can give a company an advantage because data is essential to AI systems.

“We disrupted the Symantecs, the McAfees, you know, all those other players. They're like all gone for the most part or changed or bought or whatever, and you never wanna be in a position where somebody, you know, disrupts you. So we're always like, "How do we disrupt ourselves? How do we do things differently? How do we think differently?" But at the end of the day, you know, if... My, my main focus, and I tell this to our team all the time, if we take care of the customer, the rest takes care of itself.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes companies should continually reinvent themselves to reduce the risk of being disrupted by others.

“We disrupted the Symantecs, the McAfees, you know, all those other players. They're like all gone for the most part or changed or bought or whatever, and you never wanna be in a position where somebody, you know, disrupts you.”

Claim: George Kurtz says CrowdStrike disrupted established security competitors including Symantec and McAfee, which he describes as mostly gone, changed, or acquired.

“So we're always like, "How do we disrupt ourselves? How do we do things differently? How do we think differently?" But at the end of the day, you know, if... My, my main focus, and I tell this to our team all the time, if we take care of the customer, the rest takes care of itself.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes that if CrowdStrike takes care of its customers, the rest of the business will take care of itself.

“What the customer wants is they wanna be protected, they wanna have trust in their, in their vendor and their partner, and at the end of the day, they wanna make it super economical.”

Claim: George Kurtz says customers want protection, trust in their security vendor and partner, and economical service.

“Like no one wants to spend unnecessary money. So give them the best outcome at the best cost and, and an experience that doesn't take, you know, seven consoles and six chairs to run around and, and just make it easy.”

Claim: George Kurtz says customers want strong outcomes at low cost and a simple experience that avoids managing many consoles.

“And that's the number one thing, you know, that our customers always tell me is like, "It is so easy to deploy. Your stuff just work." I had a meeting this morning, and it was like, "You know what?”

Claim: George Kurtz says customers often report that CrowdStrike products are easy to deploy and work well.

“We're... There's two companies merging together. They're gonna go with us." Um, the other company didn't have us, and it was like, "Your stuff just is so easy to deploy." And I think that's a big one is time to value.”

Claim: George Kurtz says ease of deployment and time to value matter to customers, citing a merging company that chose CrowdStrike because its products were easy to deploy.

“Well, just in general from an AI perspective, and if you look at the te- the technology changes, um, that have taken place over the last couple hundred years, like, each major shift has created more opportunity and more jobs. They're different, but there were more of them, and I firmly believe that's gonna be the case here. And, you know, when you look at whether it's programming, you're still gonna need people to manage the agents.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes each major technological shift over the past few centuries has created more jobs and opportunities, although the jobs changed in kind.

“They're different, but there were more of them, and I firmly believe that's gonna be the case here. And, you know, when you look at whether it's programming, you're still gonna need people to manage the agents. You're still gonna need people to think about these architectures. It's not just fire and forget. I know a lot of people would like to say that, but there's human creativity that you're gonna need.”

Claim: George Kurtz expects people will still be needed to manage AI agents and design or oversee architectures.

“They're different, but there were more of them, and I firmly believe that's gonna be the case here. And, you know, when you look at whether it's programming, you're still gonna need people to manage the agents.”

Claim: George Kurtz firmly expects the current technological shift to create more jobs.

“You're still gonna need people to think about these architectures. It's not just fire and forget. I know a lot of people would like to say that, but there's human creativity that you're gonna need.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes AI agents cannot simply be left to run without oversight because human creativity will still be needed.

“Uh, I think specific to cybersecurity, this is one of the areas that I, that I always talk to, to young folks about, people in, in, uh, in university, is it's a great field to be in.”

Claim: George Kurtz recommends cybersecurity as a promising field for young people.

“If you understand AI, if you understand security, it, it's an ever-changing field. It, and it's, it's actually not a solvable problem. I think every vendor would like to say they solve the pro- It's not solvable. And you, you've gotta mitigate the risk. You've gotta come up with the best solutions. You've gotta be able to protect the customers and, you know, there's a lot of things that go into it, but it's always evolving.”

Claim: George Kurtz believes cybersecurity cannot be completely solved; organizations can mitigate risk and develop strong solutions, but the problem continues to evolve.

“If you understand AI, if you understand security, it, it's an ever-changing field. It, and it's, it's actually not a solvable problem.”

Claim: George Kurtz says cybersecurity continually changes, particularly for people who understand both AI and security.

“There's gonna be technology in five years that we haven't even thought about today, and if you're in university, you're gonna be some of the people that are gonna be thinking about how you protect it. So I always, you know, try to give back and think about the, what college kids are doing or I get asked all the time from parents, "What should, what should my kids study?"”

Claim: George Kurtz predicts that technology not yet imagined will exist in five years and that current university students will help develop ways to protect it.

“I think cybersecurity and technology and AI is a fantastic field.”

Claim: George Kurtz considers cybersecurity, technology, and AI excellent fields for study or careers.