The UK’s push to embed artificial intelligence (AI) into critical national infrastructure (CNI)—including power grids, water systems, and transport networks—is raising red flags among cybersecurity and academic experts who warn the technology remains too immature to manage its associated risks.
Francesca Boem of UCL cautions that AI’s integration into infrastructure systems introduces complex cyber-physical vulnerabilities. She warns adversaries could exploit AI decision-making to destabilise energy or water systems, particularly as AI is used in sensing, forecasting, and automation.
AI’s dual dependence on software and hardware increases its exposure to threats like data poisoning, prompt injection, and model manipulation. Experts like Richard Allmendinger (Manchester Business School) stress that even small data tweaks can cause disproportionate impacts, from outages to contamination.
Operational complexity further compounds the risk. Noel Chinokwetu of Orange Cyberdefense highlights that many sectors are still aligning IT and OT systems. He cautions against rushing AI adoption, especially with known issues such as hallucinations in LLMs like ChatGPT.
Despite initiatives such as AI sandboxes by the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the FCA-Nvidia partnership for financial AI testing, experts say coverage remains insufficient. Without rigorous real-world testing, AI failures in CNI could propagate rapidly and dangerously.
A recent study shows nearly 75% of CNI organisations fear AI-enabled threats, including phishing, automated hacking, and adaptive cyberattacks.
To mitigate risks, experts call for strict human oversight, clear role delineation between AI and operators, robust security frameworks, and transparent regulatory standards.
While AI offers transformative potential for UK infrastructure, safe deployment will depend on security-first strategies, strong regulation, and responsible design to avoid systemic vulnerabilities.
Created by Amplify: AI-augmented, human-curated content.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative was first published on 1 October 2025. A similar report by GCHQ on 12 May 2025 highlighted increased cybersecurity threats due to AI in critical infrastructure. ([newcivilengineer.com](https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/growing-use-of-ai-increases-cyber-security-threat-to-critical-infrastructure-gchq-says-12-05-2025/?utm_source=openai)) The earlier report does not mention Francesca Boem, Noel Chinokwetu, or Richard Allmendinger, suggesting the current narrative may be based on a press release. This typically warrants a higher freshness score. However, the presence of similar content within the past 7 days indicates a moderate freshness score. No significant discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found.
Quotes check
Score:
8
Notes:
The quotes from Francesca Boem, Noel Chinokwetu, and Richard Allmendinger appear to be original, with no exact matches found in earlier material. This suggests potentially exclusive content. However, without access to the original press release, it's challenging to confirm the originality of these quotes.
Source reliability
Score:
6
Notes:
The narrative originates from New Civil Engineer, a reputable UK-based publication. However, the reliance on a press release introduces some uncertainty regarding the originality and potential biases in the content.
Plausability check
Score:
7
Notes:
The claims about AI integration into critical national infrastructure and associated risks are plausible and align with recent discussions in the field. The tone and language are consistent with typical corporate and official communications. No excessive or off-topic details were noted. However, the lack of supporting details from other reputable outlets and the reliance on a press release warrant further scrutiny.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative presents plausible claims about AI integration into critical national infrastructure, supported by original quotes from experts. However, the reliance on a press release and the lack of supporting details from other reputable outlets introduce uncertainties regarding the content's originality and potential biases. Further verification is needed to confirm the authenticity and accuracy of the information presented.