The VienerX Newsletter

For the full experience, please click the view in browser option located in the top right, or enable media for this email.

VienerX is proud to announce that Brivo, a market leader in cloud-based access control and physical security, has joined the VienerX product portfolio. VienerX continues to invest heavily in the physical security and access management space, an area where the company already has significant operational experience and technical depth.

Following the merger of Brivo and longtime camera industry leader Eagle Eye Networks, the combined platform now delivers one of the most advanced cloud-native physical security ecosystems in the marketplace. The Eagle Eye camera platform is now part of the broader Brivo security offering, giving VienerX customers access to a highly rated AI-driven surveillance and access control solution backed by American-made technology and enterprise-grade software.

Several VienerX technical staff members are already trained on the Brivo platform, allowing the company to support both new deployments and long-term customer growth initiatives.

The Brivo platform delivers:

Wayne Viener, CEO of VienerX, stated:

“As we continue to expand across education, enterprise, and governmental customer bases, the need for high-quality American-made security products has grown significantly. The Brivo camera system is a superior product, and we are proud to be part of the Brivo ecosystem.”

About Brivo

Brivo is a worldwide leader in cloud-based physical security and access control technology. Following its merger with Eagle Eye Networks, the company now delivers an integrated platform combining access control, AI-powered video surveillance, visitor management, intrusion monitoring, and centralized cloud-based security operations.

The Brivo platform secures more than one billion square feet of commercial space across over 80 countries worldwide. The company is headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, less than 10 miles from VienerX headquarters in Rockville.

A subtle but significant shift is happening in how the public, especially younger people, are responding to artificial intelligence. What began as curiosity and hype is increasingly giving way to something more volatile: a backlash that blends economic anxiety, cultural exhaustion, and distrust of institutions. The signs are appearing everywhere from college campuses to global corporations.

This year’s commencement season offered an early glimpse. At the University of Central Florida, graduates booed a speaker for calling AI “the next Industrial Revolution.” At the University of Arizona, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt was loudly rejected after discussing AI’s future impact on work. At Middle Tennessee State University, students booed music executive Scott Borchetta for suggesting AI would reshape creative industries. These weren’t isolated incidents, they are the generational mood.

Part of the reaction is economic. Many students spent years training for careers now described as “disrupted” before they even begin. They hear that AI may automate white‑collar work, service work, and gig work simultaneously, leaving the question hanging: “What, exactly are we supposed to do?” Unlike past technological shifts, AI threatens to compress multiple categories of labor at once, while creating far fewer new roles. That is a recipe for insecurity.

But the backlash is not only about jobs. It reflects a broader cultural pattern. Gen Z has grown up in an environment where major issues are framed in existential terms: climate catastrophe, democracy collapse, pandemics, social breakdown, AI extinction scenarios. The message is rarely “this is a challenge to manage,” but “this could destroy your future.” Social media accelerates this dynamic, turning fear and outrage into identity signals. Booing an AI‑positive speech becomes less about the technology itself and more about expressing frustration with uncertainty, elites, corporations, or rapid change.

Ironically, most students already use AI daily, for studying, coding, research, resumes, and organization. The issue is not the tools. It is the sense that the ground beneath them is shifting too quickly to trust.

And the backlash is not limited to campuses. In South Korea, Samsung, a company responsible for 12% of the nation’s GDP, narrowly avoided a strike over AI‑related profit distribution. That dispute wasn’t even about job loss; it was about who benefits from AI’s gains. Meanwhile, major outlets including Axios, The Guardian, Business Insider, CBS News, Fortune, The Independent, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times have all published stories on rising AI resistance, ten in just three days at the time of this writing. A 2025 Harvard poll found that 70% of Gen Z views AI as a threat, even before this year’s wave of tech layoffs.

What’s emerging is a two‑front backlash:

Historically, societies overreact emotionally to major technological shifts before eventually integrating them into daily life. Industrialization, computers, and the internet all triggered fears that ranged from partially correct to wildly overstated. AI will likely follow a similar path: real disruption, real adaptation, heavy media amplification, and eventual normalization.

But unlike past shifts, AI’s speed, scale, and opacity mean the backlash may arrive earlier, and hit harder, than many expect. How society handles this moment will shape the next decade, and the outcome is far from certain.

Last issue, we discussed Microsoft’s AI strategy change, and what it might mean for the rest of the industry. This week, we are discussing another Microsoft announcement, and one that may be the prelude to a much faster, and more widespread change. The leader in enterprise software announced that it will begin moving away from SMS (texting) as a form of MFA (multi-factor authentication). This move will likely upset a lot of consumers and will have IT managers thanking Redmond from the bottom of their hearts.

What is MFA and what is SMS MFA?

Briefly, MFA is a second layer of access verification on top of a password for digital accounts. These are commonly implemented through text messages, specialized apps, biometrics, or passkeys.

SMS MFA is using text messages sent to phone numbers to achieve that process.

What Does This, In Practical Terms, Mean?

In practical terms, this likely means that, over the next several years, Microsoft will gradually discourage users from selecting SMS MFA as their preferred method for securing accounts, instead pushing users toward more secure alternatives.

Microsoft, despite its flaws, is relentlessly aggressive in pursuing security goals. This mindset has made it the de-facto leader in account security practices. The company has emphasized MFA and password-less sign in for years now.

In 2021, Microsoft announced that consumers could completely remove the password from Microsoft accounts, instead opting for MFA apps, SMS MFA, security keys, or biometrics. In 2024, the software giant announced twin changes, making MFA mandatory for Azure and Microsoft 365 administrators while also making password-less the default for new personal accounts. Now, the next phase of this push appears to be here.

Why is Microsoft Doing This?

In its press release announcing this change, Microsoft stated that “SMS-based authentication is now a leading source of fraud.” While this is a difficult claim to verify, based on the opinions of our technical staff, it is probably true.

NIST (US Government Standards) has discouraged SMS MFA for years for the same reason: SMS is too easy to phish and too easy to intercept. There are simply too many ways to get into SMS-secured accounts if a bad actor really wants to. SIM swapping, malware interception, phishing attacks, and social engineering against mobile carriers, just to name a few.

While it is convenient, and certainly more secure than a password alone, digital crime is becoming too large a threat to leave these vulnerabilities exposed. Security professionals have long held this opinion, and now an industry leader in end-user account security is signaling the same thing. The attack surface is simply too large.