Professionals · code 2529

Database and network professionals not elsewhere classified

AI can watch for attacks. Attackers use AI too.

The ILO files this under a catch-all group for database and network professionals, whose tasks are mostly about data security. AI could take a fair chunk of watching for threats and planning data protection; the rest is mostly out of its reach.

What they actually do (and what else they get called)

This unit group includes database and network professionals not classified elsewhere in Minor Group 252: Database and Network Professionals. For instance, the group includes information and communications technology security specialists. In such cases tasks would include - (a) developing plans to safeguard computer files against accidental or unauthorized modification, destruction or disclosure and to meet emergency data processing needs; (b) training users and promoting security awareness to ensure system security and to improve server and network efficiency; (c) conferring with users to discuss issues such as computer data access needs, security violations and programming changes; (d) monitoring current reports of computer viruses to determine when to update virus protection systems; (e) modifying computer security files to incorporate new software, correct errors or change individual access status; (f) monitoring use of data files and regulate access to safeguard information in computer files; (g) performing risk assessments and executing tests of data processing system to ensure functioning of data processing activities and security measures; (h) encrypting data transmissions and erecting firewalls to conceal confidential information as it is being transmitted and to keep out tainted digital transfers. Examples of the occupations classified here: - Data miner - Digital forensic specialist - Security specialist (ICT)

digital forensics expert
ICT security administrator
knowledge engineer
ICT security manager
ICT resilience manager
ethical hacker
chief ICT security officer
ICT security consultant

Job titles from the EU's ESCO list. Search for any of them on the jobs page and you'll end up here.

51 / 100

Changing significantly

AI could do a real share of the everyday tasks. The job is changing shape, not vanishing.

Not the odds you keep your job. It's how much of the everyday work still needs a person, out of 100.

← Robot's turf Human's turf →

The ILO's official verdict: Exposed: Gradient 2

371 of 427 for holding up against AI

Why this score?

The ILO rated each of this job's 8 tasks for how much of it AI could do. They average 48.7 out of 100, so it holds up at 100 − 48.7 = 51.3.

That's the whole sum. No black box, no secret sauce: you can check it against the ILO's study. ILO group “Exposed: Gradient 2”: A good share of the tasks are affected.

This job rates 13.8 out of 100 for how hands-on it is. The score above only looks at AI tools, not robots, but for work this far from the physical that matters less.

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Man v Bot · compare

Who holds up better?

Database and network professionals not elsewhere classified 51

Go on, try your partner's job. Or your sibling's. We won't tell.

Man v Bot

Where the bot helps, and where the human wins

Bot

What AI takes

The routine stuff. You may not miss it.

Threat monitoring.
Security plans and documentation.
Access changes.

Man

What people still do better

Judgement, trust and skilled hands. Hard to download.

Investigating incidents.
Testing systems like an attacker.
Training people.

Both

What's arriving

New work that only exists because the AI does.

AI-powered attacks.
Securing AI systems.
Deepfake fraud.

Written by a human, from the ILO's task ratings below. Yes, we see the irony. Read it as one person's take.

Meet your two rivals

They're not the same machine. AI software can only reach the parts of a job done on a screen or in words. A chatbot can't climb a ladder. A robot might, one day, if it doesn't fall off.

The AI

Lives in a screen. Never had to fix a boiler.

Threat level: Medium

48 could do without you

It could take over some of the work, and help with more. It could help with 71 of 100.

The robot

The wildcard. Has hands, still working out stairs.

How much it matters here: Lower

14 how hands-on

Not much of this job needs hands, so the robot can sit this one out.

So could a robot do the physical part?

Less than half of this job is hands-on. Robots still matter, but for a smaller part of the work, so we don't sort it any further.

Robots hate fiddly work in awkward spaces. On that measure, this job scores 19 out of 100. The higher it is, the longer the robot waits.

14 How
hands-on

19 How fiddly
and cramped

Kind of hands-on work Less than half hands-on

The small print

They aren't a robot score, and nothing on this page is. Nobody measures how far robots have got well enough to put a number on it. These are the closest thing we have: how hands-on the job is, and how much fiddly, cramped work it takes, which is what Frey and Osborne found hardest for machines.

From O*NET, averaged across 16 US jobs , so treat it as rough.

finger skill 25.8 · hand skill 20.4 · cramped spaces 11.7 · averaged · rule: hands-on under 50

estimated O*NET 31.0 BLS occupational crosswalk chain ISCO-08 to 2010 SOC (Aug 2012, rev. Jun 2015); 2010 to 2018 SOC (Nov 2017); O*NET-SOC 2019 taxonomy data 0.8-observed-use measures chosen by Frey & Osborne (2017) · the grouping is a sorting, not a measurement

The job, task by task

Every job is really a bundle of tasks. Here's this one unpacked, with how much of each AI could do, out of 100. The score is the average, and averages can hide a lot.

AI's favourite task here scores 60, against an average of 49. The bigger the gap, the more lopsided the job: some of it wide open to AI, some of it barely touched.

60
Monitoring current reports of computer viruses to determine when to update virus protection systems

Medium
53
Developing plans to safeguard computer files against accidental or unauthorized modification, destruction or disclosure and to meet emergency data processing needs

Medium
49
Conferring with users to discuss issues such as computer data access needs, security violations, and programming changes

Low
49
Modifying computer security files to incorporate new software, correct errors or change individual access status

Low
47
Performing risk assessments and executing tests of data processing system to ensure functioning of data processing activities and security measures

Low
47
Training users and promoting security awareness to ensure system security and to improve server and network efficiency

Low
44
Monitoring use of data files and regulate access to safeguard information in computer files

Low
42
Encrypting data transmissions and erecting firewalls to conceal confidential information as it is being transmitted and to keep out tainted digital transfers.

Low

8 tasks · the High to Very Low labels are the ILO's

from the source Working Paper 140, Generative AI and Jobs 2025 index data 0.8-observed-use

Sidekick or replacement?

A tool that makes you faster is a very different thing from one that does the task while you watch. Jobs and Skills Australia measured the two separately, which is handy.

AI helps you: 71
AI does it for you: 48

Sidekick wins, by 23 points.

How good a match is this?

One Australian job matches, but only partly: not everyone in it does this job. Treat the numbers as a rough guide.

estimated Our Gen AI Transition (Gen AI Capacity Study) September 2025 detailed data release data 0.8-observed-use matched to Australian jobs 2621

Meanwhile, in real life…

Everything else here is about what AI could do. This is what people actually did. When they asked Claude for help with this kind of work, did they hand the whole task over, or roll their sleeves up and work through it together?

Out of every 100 conversations

worked through it together handed it over

The small print

Anthropic publishes this about its own product, and it doesn't feed into any score here. These are people who use Claude, not workers in general, so little use here doesn't mean AI can't reach the job. This job makes up 13.05% of the conversations.

The data is sorted by US job, and this one matches 16 of them. We've combined them, counting each by how often it comes up in the conversations, so the busiest one counts most.

These two add up to 100. The bars elsewhere on the page don't, because each is scored on its own, so we don't put them side by side.

observed use Anthropic Economic Index release 2026-06-26, period beginning 2026-05-01 data 0.8-observed-use 2026-05-01 · Anthropic, about its own product

So, should cyber security specialists be worried?

Short answer: not worried, but paying attention. The job is changing.

Parts of it are changing. Monitoring virus reports and data protection plans are rated Medium; user issues, access, risk tests, training, monitoring and encryption are Low. AI security tools take on monitoring, while AI-driven attacks create more work.

Worth remembering: we score tasks, not jobs. When AI takes on a task, the job usually reshuffles around it rather than vanishing.