Cybersecurity startup Cloudsek raises $19 million in funding led by Tenacity Ventures, Commvault
ETtech Rahul Sasi, founder, Cloudsek
Predictive cybersecurity Cloudsek has raised $19 million in a fresh funding round led by Tenacity Ventures and Commvault. Others participating in the round include Inflexor Ventures, MassMutual Ventures and Prana Ventures, along with some strategic investors.
Founded in 2015 by Rahul Sasi, Cloudsek uses its artificial intelligence (AI)-backed stack with 18 applications to predict and mitigate cyber threats.
The startup will use the capital for product innovation, global expansion and doubling down on existing international markets like the US, UAE and Asia Pacific, cofounder and CEO Rahul Sasi told ET."Today, most of the cyber threats originate from human beings. In the next few years, they will be orchestrated and planned by AI. So, humans would need smarter solutions to defend against them," Sasi said.Cloudsek's technology identifies initial attack vectors, such as leaked credentials, exposed APIs or compromised vendors, as opposed to tools that respond after a cyberattack incident. "Our version of threat intelligence is predictive, not forensic," he explained.
The startup has over 250 customers, including Fortune 500 companies, across banking, healthcare, technology and the public sector. It has so far raised $30 million. "Today, over 60% of our net new revenue comes from international markets, with the US emerging as our fastest-growing region. We have achieved this scale while staying cash flow positive," Sasi said, adding that Cloudsek is growing 70% year-on-year.
It also uses an AI-backed command centre, Nexus, trained on open source data and streamlines it in one place. Through this platform, security teams can access and analyse intelligence in real time and identify attack patterns and vulnerabilities across their digital ecosystem.The AI platform, trained via large language models and multi-language models, also provides cyber risk quantification through which companies can assess potential financial losses and regulatory impacts.Sasi said the rise of cybercrime is related to geopolitical tensions as well. "There are wars happening right now. You will see every time the economy goes down, cybercrime goes up," he said.
He added that the preventive cybersecurity market was earlier dominated by American or Israeli companies, however, India has now come to play a significant role in it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- Indian Express
The pause on tariffs, and now a stay: where does this leave Trump's disruptive trade agenda
Hours after US President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on goods imported into America from almost every nation was ruled illegal by the US Court of International Trade, an appeals court – the Federal Circuit Court in Washington, DC that has jurisdiction over the trade court – on Thursday temporarily halted the decision, reinstating the levies for now. Its order said that it would grant the Trump administration's request for an immediate administrative stay, and gave the plaintiffs — a group of 12 states and five US-based companies — until June 5 to respond to the administration. Judicial Process As the Trump administration's appeal works its way through the American courts, what is clear is that this case will probably end up at the US Supreme Court at some point in the near future. The three judge panel at the US Court of International Trade, which included one Trump appointee, had ruled unanimously that the statute the White House used, known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act or IEEPA – does not grant the American President the authority to impose tariffs with a really wide scope as were levied through Trump's reciprocal tariffs on practically all major trading partners of the US. They said in the ruling that the emergency economic powers legislation (IEEPA) does not give 'unbounded tariff authority' to the President, and that the statute can only be used for unusual and extraordinary threats. Trade deficit, they said, does not really fit that definition. At the same time, there are sector specific tariffs that the Trump administration slapped on steel, aluminum, cars and car parts etc, under a different statute known as Section 232, which could be used in the near future for things such as semiconductors and pharmaceuticals too. Those were all imposed citing national security reasons, and were distinct from the tariffs under IEEPA. Those can all stay in place for the moment, and there is a chance that the Trump administration would now use provisions such as Section 232 to impose such sector-specific tariffs on countries, especially if the Federal Circuit court were to also rule against the IEEPA levies. What needs to be kept in mind is that apart from this case at the International Trade Court filed by the dozen other states and some small businesses, there is another high-profile case in California from the Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom arguing that Trump's trade tariffs were illegal. This, according to legal experts, is the case to watch out for. Ensuing Uncertainty In the meantime, what is unclear is whether business should ultimately plan for relief if the trade court's ruling stands, or whether the tariffs might stick. That raises the real question about whether the so-called reciprocal tariffs due in July will ever come into effect, whether the 10 per cent universal tariff can stay, whether the US Congress will come to the president's rescue, and what the final judgement of the Supreme Court will be. This course will decide whether nations need to negotiate for deals with the US. And during the appeals process, the Trump administration could seek alternate routes to deploy additional tariffs, according to experts. This could add to the uncertainties. The earlier ruling halting the imposition of the levies serves to undermine ongoing attempts by the US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to negotiate trade deals with other countries, including India. The UK is looking somewhat imprudent in having already rushed into a trade deal with the US, which retains the 10 per cent base rate that was part of Trump's original plan. This is despite the US have a trade surplus with the UK. Others such as Japan and the European Union were already holding back, after seeing the Trump administration beat a retreat amid an upheaval in the US government borrowing rates. The legal uncertainty is a further reason for countries to wait and watch. With negotiators from the US set to arrive in New Delhi for trade talks on June 5-6, officials in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry said they are 'studying the implications' of the US Court of International Trade's Wednesday ruling. Trump had on April 2 announced a steep 26 per cent reciprocal tariff on India, despite New Delhi agreeing to commence negotiations with Washington on a trade deal. The tariffs were paused till July 8, and the Indian government is keen to sign an interim trade deal before that. The legal developments, though, could warrant a recalibration now. Legal experts are of the view that the Trump administration could have a weak case, especially when it comes to the question of law on IEEPA. Constitutionally, in America, trade policy is the domain of the US Congress and the chairs of the Trade committees of the House and Senate (branches of the Ways and Means Committee) are typically very powerful positions. President Trump bypassed all of that by proclaiming a variety of national emergencies. While he has some scope to act in actual emergencies, under powers ceded by the US COngress to the White House over the decades, these two specific cases contend that the sweeping use of these powers to announce permanent tariff changes was illegal and unconstitutional. That could hold water. The Court of International Trade ruling appears rather robust from that perspective, and also emboldens California's similar case. For now, it would be prudent to expect other negotiators around the world to put their feet up and wait, while the White House tries to prove the legality of the very basis of its global trade onslaught. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
Mint
42 minutes ago
- Mint
Targeting Chinese students threatens the bottom line at American universities
A Trump administration announcement Wednesday that it would 'aggressively" begin revoking visas for Chinese students confronts universities across the U.S. with the prospect of a hit to their finances and talent pool. The move comes on top of a push to bar Harvard University from enrolling international students as part of the president's battle with the school. The Trump administration has also paused new student-visa interviews while it prepares new measures to vet applicants' social-media accounts, according to a State Department cable. American universities significantly increased their enrollment of Chinese students in the years following the 2008-09 financial crisis, when many suffered budget shortfalls. Typically, Chinese undergraduates pay full tuition, a critical source of revenue for universities. One in every four international students comes from China, and Chinese students form a particularly large share of the student body at top U.S. schools. After they graduate, many assume key roles in U.S. science and engineering endeavors. A big decline in Chinese enrollment could severely cut into schools' bottom line and damage U.S. competitiveness, say U.S. experts. 'The economic costs are apparent," said Yingyi Ma, a sociologist at Syracuse University who studies international students in the U.S. 'The talent cost has even graver consequences." Scrutiny of students from China has intensified in the months since President Trump returned to the White House. In the past few months, Republican lawmakers have called for a halt to student visas for Chinese nationals as well as stripping them of access to national labs over national-security concerns. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday the U.S. will revoke visas of students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. Many Chinese students had already started looking elsewhere. For the past six years, the U.K. has been the most popular studying-abroad destination for Chinese students, according to a recent report by New Oriental Education & Technology Group. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman on Thursday condemned Washington's action as politically motivated and discriminatory. China was for years the No. 1 supplier of international students to U.S. universities. More international students now come from India than China, though China still sends the most undergraduates. That means China remains the largest buyer of education-related services, including spending on tuition and books, from the U.S., at $14.3 billion in 2023, 21% more than the $11.8 billion spent by students from India, and more than six times as much as students from South Korea, another major supplier of international students to the U.S. In 2023, education-related services made up 5% of U.S. services exports to the world, while they were 31% of service exports to China. Studies have shown that suspending visas for foreigners undermines U.S. innovation. In the 1920s, Congress introduced a country-specific quota system that cut immigration to the U.S. by more than 80%. As a result, fewer foreign scientists came to the U.S., which led to a sharp decline in inventions, according to research by New York University professors published in 2020. The damage persisted into the 1960s, their paper said. Suspicion has ramped up in particular around Chinese students studying science, technology, engineering and math, the largest chunk of Chinese students in the U.S., as the U.S. and China lock horns in an escalating competition over technological and geopolitical supremacy. Sen. Jim Risch (R., Idaho) in January characterized every STEM student from China as an 'agent of the Chinese Communist Party." A select House committee on China, which last week demanded information from Harvard about its partnership with Chinese entities, earlier this year asked six universities for information about the schools' Chinese graduate students in STEM programs, such as their alma maters and funding sources, and questioned their involvement in federally funded research. Student groups dispute a contention lawmakers have made, that Chinese STEM students rush to take their know-how back to China after graduation, saying that despite pressure they have faced, many go to great lengths to be able to remain. In 2023, 83% of the Chinese STEM graduates who obtained their doctoral degrees between 2017 and 2019 were still in the U.S., well above the average rate. Of the top 15 American universities by STEM programs that publish their international student profiles, Chinese students are the largest foreign student group at all but one university and make up nearly half at six. Steven Kivelson, a Stanford University theoretical physicist, in an April virtual event called China the single most important pipeline of talent. 'All of this is very much at risk now," he said. Write to Shen Lu at Liyan Qi at and Ming Li at
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Trump admin reverses planned closures of 3 dozen US mine safety offices
The Donald Trump administration is dropping plans to terminate leases for 34 offices in the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), the agency responsible for enforcing mine safety laws, the Department of Labour said Thursday. Earlier this year, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), created by President Donald Trump and run by Elon Musk, targeted federal agencies for spending cuts, including terminating leases for three dozen MSHA offices. Seven of those offices were in Kentucky alone. Ending the MSHA leases had been projected to save $18 million. Musk said this week that he's leaving his job as a senior advisor to the Trump administration. A statement released by a Labour Department spokesperson said it has been working closely with the General Services Administration "to ensure our MSHA inspectors have the resources they need to carry out their core mission to prevent death, illness, and injury from mining and promote safe and healthy workplaces for American miners". Some MSHA offices are still listed on the chopping block on the DOGE website, but the statement did not indicate whether those closings will move forward. MSHA was created by Congress within the Labour Department in 1978, in part because state inspectors were seen as too close to the industry to force coal companies to take the sometimes costly steps necessary to protect miners. MSHA is required to inspect each underground mine quarterly and each surface mine twice a year. Mining fatalities over the past four decades have dropped significantly, in large part because of the dramatic decline in coal production. But the proposed DOGE cuts would have required MSHA inspectors to travel further to get to a mine. A review in March of publicly available data by the Appalachian Citizens' Law Centre indicates that nearly 17,000 health and safety inspections were conducted from the beginning of 2024 through February 2025 by staff at MSHA offices in the facilities on the chopping block. MSHA, which also oversees metal and nonmetal mines, was already understaffed. Over the past decade, it has seen a 27 per cent reduction in total staff, including 30 per cent of enforcement staff in general and 50 per cent of enforcement staff for coal mines, the law centre said. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
