Unconfirmed: The Information said in an X post on 8 November that thousands of AI agents run inside corporate systems untracked, naming Cyera, Okta and SailPoint as companies working on the problem, and Automatica has not confirmed the claim.
@theinformation wrote on 8 November1: "Thousands of AI agents are operating inside corporate systems without anyone tracking them, creating a growing security problem that companies like Cyera, Okta and SailPoint are racing to solve. Full story:" followed by a shortened link. Automatica did not retrieve the linked article, so everything here rests on that one post.
The post came from the outlet's own account, which shows about 1.6 million followers, so attribution is not in question. What the post can establish is limited to what The Information says.
The post leaves out most of what a security reader would need to judge it. "Thousands" is the only quantity, and it gives no denominator: how many companies, over what period, or measured how. It does not say what counts as an agent or what "tracking" means, whether that is an inventory, identity management or activity logging.
It also names no affected product or version and does not describe what access the untracked agents hold. It reports no incident and no exploitation, and it offers no attacker prerequisites. "A growing security problem" is the outlet's characterization, not a described vulnerability.
The post says the three companies are "racing to solve" the problem. It does not say whether they were interviewed or supplied the number. Automatica found no statements from Cyera, Okta or SailPoint on the claim. It also has no earlier reporting on this claim.
The full article would show the basis for the claim if it gives the source of the number, the method and the type of agents counted. If the figure came from the named companies, how they measured it would matter, since the post describes them as working on the problem.
On-record comment from any of the three companies would also help, whether it supports the claim or disputes it. So would a clarification from The Information that "thousands" refers to a narrower set of deployments than the post's wording suggests, which would undercut the broad reading.