{"id":207130,"date":"2026-04-29T12:35:00","date_gmt":"2026-04-29T16:35:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/2026\/04\/29\/cybersecurity-report-says-ai-enabled-medtech-introduces-new-risks\/"},"modified":"2026-04-29T14:40:11","modified_gmt":"2026-04-29T18:40:11","slug":"cybersecurity-report-says-ai-enabled-medtech-introduces-new-risks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/2026\/04\/29\/cybersecurity-report-says-ai-enabled-medtech-introduces-new-risks\/","title":{"rendered":"Cybersecurity report says AI-enabled medtech introduces new risks"},"content":{"rendered":"

Cybersecurity report says AI-enabled medtech introduces new risks<\/a><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com\/runsafe-cybersecurity-report-2026-ai-risks\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Publish Date: 2026-04-29 12:35:00<\/a><\/p>\n

Source Domain: www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com<\/a><\/p>\n

Author: <\/a><\/p>\n

Using an unordered list, summarize the following article with between 4 and 8 key points. Cyber incidents caused extended hospital stays and manual workarounds affected nearly half of the impacted organizations, RunSafe said. [Illustration by Stockye Studio via Stock.Adobe.com]Nearly 60% of healthcare organizations\u2019 professionals are \u201cextremely\u201d or \u201cvery\u201d concerned about cybersecurity attacks impacting medical devices and some organizations have already experienced attacks that impact patient care, according to a survey commissioned by RunSafe Security.
\nRunSafe said it surveyed 551 healthcare professionals in the U.S., U.K. and Germany who are involved in device purchasing decisions and familiar with their organizations\u2019 cybersecurity practices.
\nThe cybersecurity software vendor asked those decision-makers about cybersecurity incidents involving medical devices and how cybersecurity factors into their device purchases.
\n\u201cThe findings land against a backdrop of large-scale healthcare cyber incidents that have disrupted care delivery and revenue flows, underscoring how quickly attacks on device-adjacent systems can translate into patient harm,\u201d RunSafe Security founder and CEO Joe Saunders said in a news release.
\nMDO Webinar: Join us and RunSafe CEO Joseph Saunders to learn more about security for medical devices on May 12.
\nThe survey found 24% of healthcare facilities reported cyberattacks affecting medical devices, up from 22% the year before. The majority (80%) of those affected reported moderate or significant impact on patient care.
\nCyber incidents caused extended hospital stays and manual workarounds affected nearly half of the impacted organizations, RunSafe said, and recovery times are growing longer as a result. Almost two-fifths (39%) of the impacted facilities reported 5 to 12 hours of downtime, with 37% reporting 1 to 4 hours of disruption.
\nRunSafe Security founder and CEO Joe Saunders [Photo courtesy of RunSafe Security]\u201cCyberattacks are becoming more frequent, the impact on patient care is worsening, and legacy device exposure persists in critical environments,\u201d the report said.
\nThe most common medtech affected by those incidents were electronic health records systems (35%), patient monitoring devices (23%), laboratory and diagnostic equipment (18%), networked surgical equipment (10%) and imaging systems (8%).
\nLast year, malware infections and network intrusions were the most dominant forms of reported cyberattacks. In 2026, malware infections (48%) and network intrusions (41%) still make up the majority of attacks, but remote access exploitation has emerged as a major threat at 38%.
\nRunSafe said the emergence of remote access exploitation signals that \u201cattackers are adapting to the growing remote access footprint of connected devices.\u201d
\n\u201cDevices that were once air-gapped are now networked, and that expanded attack surface is being exploited,\u201d the report said. \u201cOrganizations that have not implemented network segmentation, access controls, and runtime protections are exposed.\u201d
\nAI-enabled devices are introducing new risks that organizations aren\u2019t fully equipped to manage, the report said.
\nOver half (57%) of the organizations surveyed currently use AI-enabled or AI-assisted medical devices or clinical systems. But rapid AI adoption is outpacing confidence in understanding the associated cybersecurity risks with the technology.
\nRelated: What Stryker\u2019s recent cyberattack could mean for medtech, healthcare
\n\u201cAs AI-driven diagnostics and decision support become standard, the attack surface they create \u2014 including model manipulation, data poisoning, and adversarial inputs \u2014 will demand specific procurement and monitoring frameworks that most organizations have not yet developed,\u201d the report said.
\n\u201cWhile investment and security maturity are increasing, new technologies such as AI are expanding the attack surface faster than organizations can secure it. Without dedicated frameworks, this gap is likely to widen,\u201d the report continued.
\nDespite concerns, confidence in detection and containment of cyber threats improved this year, with 22% of respondents claiming they feel \u201cextremely confident\u201d with their organization\u2019s cybersecurity resources compared to just 17% last year.
\nThis year\u2019s data shows organizations reinforcing their cybersecurity efforts with sustained investment with medical device and operational technology (OT) security treated as ongoing strategic priorities rather than one-time initiatives.
\nIn 2026, 77% of surveyed organizations increased their medical device and OT security budgets, with 21% reporting a significant increase. Less than 1% reported a reduced investment.
\nWhat medical device buyers want from vendors
\nIn 2026, 40% of organizations surveyed reported that cybersecurity incidents had affected their trust in specific vendors, with 7% reporting they have stopped purchasing from specific vendors entirely.
\n\u201cMore organizations are requiring cybersecurity in request-for-proposals (RFPs), more are demanding detailed requirements, and more are walking away from devices that don\u2019t pass muster,\u201d the report said.
\nRunSafe\u2019s survey found 84% of healthcare organizations include cybersecurity requirements in their vendor request-for-proposals, with 43% including detailed security requirements, up from 38% in 2025. More than half (56%) have declined to purchase a device due to cybersecurity concerns.
\nThe most cited grounds for sales rejection were: known vulnerabilities (48%), lack of security patching support (47%), weak authentication or access controls (46%), poor overall vendor security practices (42%), lack of software bill of materials (SBOMs) or software transparency (34%), and unsupported or legacy operating systems (31%).
\nRelated: Medtronic discloses cybersecurity breach in certain IT systems
\nNearly 79% of survey respondents said FDA cybersecurity guidance and EU MDR requirements have influenced their procurement processes, up from 73% last year. Fewer than 3% of respondents reported that relations have had no impact on their procurement processes.
\nRunSafe says the regulatory impact data \u201creflects a healthcare sector that is actively monitoring evolving regulatory frameworks and adjusting its vendor expectations accordingly.\u201d
\n\u201cOne of the clearest manifestations of this regulatory influence is the widespread adoption of SBOMs, which have quickly become a standard requirement in device evaluation,\u201d the report said.
\nThe majority of surveyors (81%) said SBOMs for software component transparency are \u201cessential\u201d or \u201cimportant\u201d when evaluating devices, with 35% of respondents saying they won\u2019t consider a device without an SBOM.
\n\u201cAn organization that rates SBOMs as \u2018essential\u2019 will not evaluate devices lacking one,\u201d the report said. \u201cWith 35% of healthcare purchasers holding this position, vendors without SBOM capabilities are disqualifying themselves from a substantial portion of the market.\u201d
\nThe report says 79% of respondents said they would pay a premium for devices with advanced cybersecurity, with nearly half (49%) willing to pay 5% or more.
\nWhen organizations were asked about specific cybersecurity requirements that influence their purchasing decisions, they requested capabilities such as, secure software update mechanisms (62%), secure authentication and access controls (61%), third-party security testing or certification (48%), runtime or exploit protection technologies (37%) vendor vulnerability disclosure programs (36%), SBOMs (31%) and post-market patching commitments (25%).
\nRunSafe said one of the most difficult cybersecurity challenges facing healthcare organizations is devices that facilities can\u2019t replace. Nearly three in ten organizations (28%) operate medical devices that are past the manufacturer\u2019s end-of-support, the report said, and a significant portion of those devices carry known, unpatched vulnerabilities.
\n\u201cThe inability to patch, combined with continued clinical reliance on vulnerable devices, creates a structural security gap that cannot be closed solely through procurement alone,\u201d the report said. \u201cThis gap is almost certainly a key driver behind the rise in runtime protection adoption seen in 2026.\u201d
\nOver 82% of healthcare organizations are reported to have deployed or are actively piloting advanced cybersecurity technology, such as runtime exploit protection technology that defends devices when patches can\u2019t be applied.
\nRelated: Build, Borrow, or Risk It? AI, Open Source, and Software Security for Medical Devices
\nLess than 1% of survey respondents who are aware of runtime protection said they have no plan to use the technology. Among those unfamiliar with the protection technology, 16% have heard of it but don\u2019t fully understand it. RunSafe said this data represents an \u201ceducation opportunity for vendors and security teams.\u201d
\n\u201cSurvey data shows that the overwhelming majority of healthcare organizations have integrated cybersecurity requirements into their vendor evaluation processes and that these requirements are having a measurable impact on purchasing outcomes,\u201d the report said.
\nOnly 2.4% of respondents said cybersecurity is absent from their RFP process and nearly 8% plan to add it, meaning fewer than one in 10 organizations are not yet including security criteria in vendor evaluations.
\n\u201cWhat the data reveals is an industry that has internalized the threat and is responding with greater urgency, more specific procurement requirements, and growing investment,\u201d the report said. \u201cBut it also reveals persistent structural gaps in confidence, in legacy device management, and in the emerging security challenges posed by AI-enabled devices that spending alone has not closed.\u201d
\nYou can download the full report at RunSafe Security\u2019s website.<\/p>\n

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

Cybersecurity report says AI-enabled medtech introduces new risks https:\/\/www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com\/runsafe-cybersecurity-report-2026-ai-risks\/ Publish Date: 2026-04-29 12:35:00 Source Domain:…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":207131,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/www.medicaldesignandoutsourcing.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Cybersecurity-AdobeStock_801762142.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[26,30,24,31,32,27],"class_list":["post-207130","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cybersecurity","tag-ai","tag-breach","tag-cybersecurity","tag-exploit","tag-malware","tag-vulnerability"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207130"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=207130"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207130\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":207132,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207130\/revisions\/207132"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/207131"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=207130"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=207130"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=207130"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}