Secure Cloud-Native Platforms for Critical Service Continuity: An AI-Driven Framework for National Cyber and Economic Resilience
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/ajise.v5i2.8248Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Cloud-Native Platforms, Critical Infrastructure, Cyber Resilience, Economic ResilienceAbstract
The growing dependence of governments, financial institutions, healthcare organizations, energy providers, transportation networks, and communication systems on “cloud-native” platforms has made it more important than ever that these digital services be delivered continuously and securely. Cloud-native architectures offer scalability, flexibility, and quick deployment using microservices, containers, orchestration, and DevSecOps practices, but they also present complex cybersecurity, operational, and supply chain threats to the country’s critical infrastructure and economic well-being. The existing research focuses on cloud resilience, artificial intelligence for IT operations (AIOps), cybersecurity or governance individually, causing approaches to be disjointed and suboptimal for critical service continuity during large-scale cyber incidents. In this research, the authors introduce the AI-powered Integrated Cyber-Economic Resilience (AICER) Framework, which is a conceptual framework that integrates cloud-native infrastructure, cybersecurity intelligence, AI-assisted operational analytics, secure software delivery, economic impact assessment, and governance into a comprehensive decision-support architecture. The framework is formulated on the basis of Design Science Research Methodology (DSRM) and supported by an integrative literature review encompassing the most recent literature, international cybersecurity standards, and cloud computing best practices. The proposed framework does not introduce new performance metrics but rather builds on existing metrics, such as Service Level Objectives (SLOs), availability and reliability metrics, Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF), Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR), DORA software delivery metrics, Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS), Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), Software Levels for Supply Chain Security (SLSA), and NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF 2.0) and NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF). The framework also takes economic impact into account to inform decisions on recovery for nationally significant services. The proposed architecture provides a vision for a policy-aware and AI-driven approach to enhancing cyber resilience, bolstering critical infrastructure, and fortifying continuity of essential digital services. The study provides a strong foundation for further prototype implementation, experimental validation, and deployment in public and private critical sectors.
Downloads
References
Afolabi, E. O., & Nwabueze, G. (2026). Security challenges in AI and cloud infrastructure, including software supply chains and model-deployment pipelines. American Journal of Innovation in Science and Engineering, 5(2), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajise.v5i2.7220
Beyer, B., Jones, C., Petoff, J., & Murphy, N. R. (Eds.). (2016). Site reliability engineering: How Google runs production systems. O’Reilly Media.
Burns, B., Grant, B., Oppenheimer, D., Brewer, E., & Wilkes, J. (2016). Borg, Omega, and Kubernetes. Communications of the ACM, 59(5), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1145/2890784
Chinonye, A. E., & Onah, B. I. (2025). Assessing the efficacy of AI-based techniques in anomaly detection in financial institutions. American Journal of Data Science and Artificial Intelligence, 1(2), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajdsai.v1i2.5062
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. (2023). Cross-sector cyber performance goals. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.cisa.gov/cross-sector-cybersecurity-performance-goals
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. (2024). Secure by design: Shifting the balance of cybersecurity risk. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. https://www.cisa.gov/securebydesign
Forsgren, N., Humble, J., & Kim, G. (2018). Accelerate: The science of lean software and DevOps: Building and scaling high-performing technology organizations. IT Revolution Press.
Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams. (2024). Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS). https://www.first.org/epss/
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
Khan, P., Islam, M. Z., & Hossain, S. (2025). AI-powered cybersecurity: Revolutionizing business threat detection and response. American Journal of Smart Technology and Solutions, 4(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajsts.v4i1.4488
Mir, J. Y., & Mir, F. (in press). Strengthening U.S. digital infrastructure through AI-powered cloud-native software resilience and secure delivery systems. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2022). Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF) version 1.1: Recommendations for mitigating the risk of software vulnerabilities (NIST Special Publication 800-218). U.S. Department of Commerce. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) (NIST AI 100-1). U.S. Department of Commerce. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2024a). National Vulnerability Database: Common Vulnerability Scoring System. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln-metrics/cvss
National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2024b). The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0. U.S. Department of Commerce. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.CSWP.29
Open Source Security Foundation. (2023). Software Levels for Supply Chain Security (SLSA) specification version 1.0. https://slsa.dev/spec/v1.0/
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
Singh, S., Kubam, C. S., Modh, N. N., Zubair, K. M., & Ashanand. (2025). A bio-inspired deep learning intrusion detection framework for cyber-physical system security. In 2025 International Conference on Computational Intelligence, Security, and Artificial Intelligence (IntelliSecAI) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IntelliSecAI66368.2025.11473168
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Soumik, M. S., Sutrudhar, B., & Hussain, M. K. (2026). Enhancing U.S. national security through AI-driven predictive analytics for cyber threat detection in critical infrastructure. American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation, 5(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajiri.v5i1.6225
Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2016). FEDS: A framework for evaluation in design science research. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.36
Zubair, K. M., Akash, T. R., & Chowdhury, S. A. (2023). Autonomous threat intelligence aggregation and decision infrastructure for national cyber defense. Frontiers in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, 2(2), 26–51.
Zubair, K. M., Rallabandi, B. R., Yadav, A., Kaushik, K., Wankhade, S., & Soni, M. (2025). Explainable AI-driven intrusion response architecture for autonomous cyber defense systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Digital Innovation and Sustainable Solutions (ICDISS) (pp. 1–6).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jawad Yaqoob Mir, Fawad Mir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
