TL;DR: AI-driven traffic grew 187% in 2025 and agent-driven traffic alone grew 7,851%, according to HUMAN's 2026 State of AI Traffic & Cyberthreat Benchmark Report, exposing how traditional analytics still flatten humans, bots and AI agents into one control problem. Visibility, classification and trust-based response now determine whether organisations can measure, govern and safely act on agentic traffic.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by HUMAN: “Agentic Visibility: How to See AI Agents in Your Traffic”.
By the numbers:
- AI-driven traffic grew 187% in 2025, according to HUMAN.
Key questions
Q: How should security teams govern AI agents that browse and transact on behalf of users?
A: Security teams should govern AI agents as delegated actors with narrow, task-scoped permissions, not as enhanced browsers.
Q: Why does bot-only traffic analysis fail for AI agents?
A: Because AI agents do not behave like simple crawlers.
Q: What are the signs that visibility is failing in an agentic environment?
A: A common sign is when analysts can describe individual events but cannot reconstruct the full path from initial interaction to downstream impact.
Practitioner guidance
- Define an agent traffic policy model Set explicit handling rules for high-trust, medium-trust and low-trust AI agents, including when they can browse, compare, log in or be blocked.
- Instrument session-level agent telemetry Capture routes, pageviews, search terms and completion signals so each agent session can be reviewed rather than only aggregate traffic counted.
- Separate agent metrics from human analytics Create reporting that isolates AI-driven traffic from human visitors and traditional bots so attribution and journey data remain decision-grade.
Bottom line: AI agents are already large enough in web traffic to distort analytics, attribution and journey analysis when organisations cannot classify them cleanly.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →