CBK · TN · Mid-size bank ($1B to $50B)
Total assets of FDIC-insured bank subsidiaries: $2.3B at the end of 2025
Filings on the SEC website · This bank on Bankgraph
| In the 2025 report | This bank | Banks of its size |
|---|---|---|
| Using AI now | No | 26 of 221 (12%) |
| Explains how AI is controlled | Yes | 55 of 221 (25%) |
| Sees AI as a risk | Yes | 184 of 221 (83%) |
| Mentions generative AI | Yes | 112 of 221 (51%) |
| Mentions AI agents | No | 18 of 221 (8%) |
● The adoption of artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools by us and our third-party vendors and service providers may increase the risk of errors, omissions, unfair treatment or fraudulent behavior by our employees, customers or counterparties, or other third parties.
Similar wording appears in 5 other banks' reports.
Cybersecurity risks for banking organizations have significantly increased in recent years in part because of the proliferation of new technologies and the widespread use of the internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions. Cybersecurity risks may increase in the future as we continue to increase our mobile-payment and other internet-based product offerings and expand our internal use of web-based and cloud-based products and applications. Even the most advanced internal control environment may be vulnerable to compromise. Targeted social engineering attacks are becoming more prevalent and sophisticated and are extremely difficult to prevent. AI, including generative AI machine learning and similar tools and technologies that collect, aggregate, analyze or generate data or other materials or content, is further increasing risks in this area, including by making fraud detection more difficult, particularly with detection devices that use voice recognition or authentication. The techniques used by bad actors change frequently, may not be recognized until launched and may not be recognized until well after a breach has occurred. Additionally, the existence of cyberattacks or security breaches at third parties with access to our data, such as vendors, may not be disclosed to us in a timely manner. Consistent with industry trends, we remain at risk for attempted electronic fraudulent activity, as well as attempts at security breaches and cybersecurity-related incidents. Cloud technologies are also critical to the operation of our systems, and our reliance on cloud technologies is growing. Service disruptions in cloud technologies or intrusion into those of our systems hosted on cloud-based technologies may lead to unauthorized access of, delays in accessing, or the loss of data that is important to our businesses and may hinder our customers’ access to our products and services, which would negatively impact our operations which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.
The adoption of AI tools by us and our third-party vendors and service providers may increase the risk of errors, omissions, unfair treatment or fraudulent behavior by our employees, customers or counterparties, or other third parties.
Our adoption of AI for limited internal use has increased our efficiency, and we expect to continue to adopt such tools as appropriate. In addition, we expect our third-party vendors and service providers to increasingly develop and incorporate AI into their product offerings faster than we are able to do so independently. There are significant risks involved in utilizing AI and no assurance can be provided that our or our third-party vendors’ or service providers’ use of AI will enhance our or our third-party vendors’ or service providers’ products or services or produce the intended results. The adoption and incorporation of such tools can lead to concerns around safety and soundness, fair access to financial services, fair treatment of consumers and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Such risk can result from models being poorly designed or faulty data being used, inadequate model testing or validation, narrow or limited human oversight, inadequate planning or due diligence, inappropriate or controversial data practices by developers or end-users, and other factors adversely affecting public opinion of AI and the acceptance of AI solutions. Furthermore, given the pace of rapid adoption of such tools by vendors and service providers, we may not be aware of the addition of AI solutions prior to such tools being introduced into our environment. Failure to adequately manage AI risks, particularly generative AI, can result in erroneous results and decisions made by misinformation, unwanted forms of bias, unauthorized access to sensitive, confidential, proprietary or personal information and violations of applicable laws and regulations, leading to operational inefficiencies, competitive harm, reputational harm, ethical challenges, legal liability, losses, fines and other adverse impacts on our business and financial results. If we do not have sufficient rights to use the data or other material or content on which the AI tools we use rely, or to use the output of such AI tools, we also may incur liability through the violation of applicable laws and regulations, third-party intellectual property, privacy or other rights or contracts to which we are a party.
Similar wording appears in 7 other banks' reports.
In addition, regulation of AI is rapidly evolving as federal and state legislators and regulators are increasingly focused on these powerful emerging technologies. The technologies underlying AI and its uses are subject to a variety of laws and regulations, including intellectual property, data privacy and cybersecurity, consumer protection, competition, equal opportunity and fair lending laws, and are expected to be subject to increased regulation and new laws or new applications of existing laws and regulations. AI is the subject of ongoing review by various U.S. governmental and regulatory agencies, and various U.S. states are applying, or are considering applying, existing laws and regulations to AI or are considering general legal frameworks for AI. For example, in December 2025, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at preventing varied state AI regulations and calling for a legislative proposal for a uniform federal AI framework to preempt state AI laws. The executive order directed the U.S. Attorney General to establish an AI Litigation Taken Force within the U.S. Department of Justice (the“DOJ”) to challenge state AI laws, required the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate restricting funding for states with onerous AI regulations and directed certain federal agencies to consider preemption of existing state AI laws. While the content and impact of any future federal or state AI laws or regulations are unclear, such future AI laws and regulations may pertain to data privacy, data protection, and the ethical use of AI, as well as clarifying intellectual property considerations. We may not be able to anticipate how to respond to these rapidly evolving frameworks, and we may need to expend resources to adjust our operations or offerings in certain jurisdictions if the legal frameworks are inconsistent across jurisdictions. Moreover, because AI technology itself is highly complex and rapidly developing, it is not possible to predict all of the legal, operational or technological risks that may arise relating to the use of AI. Our use of AI could give rise to legal or regulatory action, increased scrutiny or liability, damage our reputation or otherwise materially harm our business. Additionally, if we fail to keep pace with rapidly evolving AI technological developments, our competitive position and business results may be negatively impacted.
● failure to keep pace with technological change, including the increasing use of artificial intelligence, or difficulties when implementing new technologies;