Intelligence-Led Border Security in the Age of AI: A Conversation with i2 Group’s Zach Beus — i2 Group - October 29, 2025

Border security sits at the intersection of policy, technology, and public trust. Agencies face an unrelenting flow of structured, unstructured, and semi-structured data — from shipping manifests and sensor feeds to social media intelligence — while operating under intense scrutiny. Traditional, siloed approaches to analysis cannot keep pace with the scale, diversity, and velocity of information.

For many leaders in the national security and law enforcement community, the central challenge is not data scarcity but rather how to integrate, analyze, and act upon vast volumes of intelligence in ways that are transparent, explainable, and effective. Artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced visualization platforms are reshaping that equation, promising to reduce workloads while freeing analysts to focus on higher-order tasks.

To explore these dynamics, BizTechReports spoke with Zach Beus, national security lead at i2 Group, a Harris Computer company. Drawing on more than a decade of experience with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and partnerships with federal, state, and local agencies, Beus discussed his perspective on the innovations driving intelligence analysis.

NOTE: This interview has been edited for space, readability and to extract Beus’ strategic, operational, financial, and technological imperatives for intelligence-optimized border security in today’s environment.

STRATEGIC ASSESSMENTS

Zach Beus, National Security Lead at i2 Group

BTR: From a strategic perspective, how do you see the intelligence landscape evolving in border security operations?

Beus: The data itself isn’t the main problem — it’s that the data is diverse, fast-moving, fractured, and siloed. Agencies like CBP and ICE are drowning in information, but traditional case-by-case workflows often limit them to reactive approaches. Strategically, the shift must be toward proactive, intelligence-led methods. That means integrating data from across domains — manifests, travel records, geospatial intelligence, financial intelligence, even social media — into platforms that allow us to detect threats before they materialize.

BTR: What role do partnerships play in addressing these strategic challenges?

Beus: There’s no one-size-fits-all solution for border security. Agencies require an ecosystem of partnerships that combine platform innovation with integration expertise. Legacy systems don’t disappear overnight. The most effective strategies blend new technologies like AI and graph analytics with the institutional knowledge and infrastructure that agencies already have in place.

OPERATIONAL IMPERATIVES

BTR: You’ve emphasized the complexity of operations. What are the most pressing operational imperatives agencies face today?

Beus: Efficiency and standardization. When I was an analyst, I sometimes had to perform searches 16 times across different systems on the same person. That’s not sustainable. A federated search capability, paired with common data taxonomies or schemas, could save enormous amounts of time and create consistency across federal, state, and local partners.

BTR: How does AI change day-to-day operations for analysts?

Beus: AI fundamentally shifts the analyst’s role. It used to be about finding the needle in the haystack — who, what, when, where. Now AI can automate those repetitive functions. That lets analysts focus on the “why”: the intent, the context, the bigger picture. For example, what once required 100 analysts sifting through manifest logs might now take 10. That frees up 90 others to pursue long-term intelligence gaps or conduct strategic assessments. It’s a force multiplier for operational effectiveness.

 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

BTR: Border agencies always face resource constraints. How does intelligence-led analysis change the financial equation?

Beus: The value isn’t just in cutting costs; it’s in reallocating resources for maximum impact. AI reduces the manpower needed for low-level data processing, but it also makes existing staff more effective by redirecting their skills to higher-value work. From a policy standpoint, that’s significant — agencies can justify investment in technology that both improves outcomes and allows them to stretch limited budgets further. 

BTR: How do you see the investment environment evolving in this space?

Beus: Independent research shows momentum. For example, ISC² found that 70 percent of security professionals using AI tools report improved effectiveness, while surveys from the Cloud Security Alliance highlight the importance of transparency and accountability in adoption. These findings suggest agencies are not just experimenting with AI — they’re operationalizing it. The challenge now is ensuring financial investments go hand-in-hand with governance and oversight so that trust keeps pace with capability.

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT

BTR: Let’s talk about the technology itself. How is I2 Group evolving its platform to meet these demands?

Beus: We’ve modernized our flagship Analyst’s Notebook significantly. We’ve embedded natural language processing so analysts can drag and drop unstructured documents and automatically extract entities, links, and properties. We’ve developed automated insights — where Excel spreadsheets can be dropped in and transformed into dashboards that highlight critical connections. And we’ve expanded geospatial mapping capabilities so analysts can visualize movement patterns tied to phones, vehicles, or individuals in near real time.

The point isn’t to overwhelm analysts with more tools, but to simplify workflows. We want them to be less like data managers and more like intelligence professionals. And because collaboration is essential, we’ve ensured that finished intelligence products — whether they’re digital files, presentations, or wall-sized maps — can be easily shared across agencies and partners.

BTR: Where do you see the next frontier in technology development for border security intelligence?

Beus: Standardization and explainability. Agencies are beginning to adopt governance frameworks and audit practices to show how AI-derived insights are produced. That’s critical in missions like border security, where ethical and policy considerations are always in play. The technology itself is already capable — the real frontier is building trust, transparency, and interoperability across jurisdictions.

Conclusion

The border security mission illustrates the broader challenge of modern intelligence: how to make sense of fragmented, fast-moving data in a way that is both effective and accountable. As Zach Beus makes clear, the promise of AI lies not in replacing analysts, but in empowering them to focus on higher-order questions of intent and context.

 Strategically, the imperative is to move from reactive to proactive postures. Operationally, agencies must break down silos and adopt common frameworks. Financially, AI enables better resource allocation, even in constrained environments. And technologically, platforms like i2 Group’s Analyst’s Notebook are evolving to embed advanced analytics and visualization while maintaining transparency and trust.

For policymakers and practitioners alike, the message is straightforward: intelligence-led border security depends on an ecosystem of partnerships, governance, and technology that elevates human judgment rather than replaces it. As agencies adopt these tools, the opportunity is not just greater efficiency — it’s the chance to build a more proactive, transparent, and resilient approach to one of the nation’s most visible security challenges.