To the authors' knowledge, ThreatForest is the first end-to-end system that turns a code repository into TTP-mapped attack trees with evidence-based mitigations across adversary frameworks, with a reusable framework for benchmarking such systems.
Abstract
Threat modeling is essential for secure software development, yet manual analysis of cloud-native architectures is slow and demands scarce security expertise. We present ThreatForest, a multi-agent system that generates structured attack trees from source code repositories, maps attack steps to adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) from a pluggable set of frameworks (MITRE ATT&CK, CAPEC, and cloud-specific threat matrices), and synthesizes actionable mitigations. ThreatForest decomposes threat modeling into a multi-stage agent pipeline -- repository analysis, context refinement, threat generation, parallel attack-tree construction with TTP mapping and mitigation synthesis, and report generation -- orchestrated as a directed graph with deterministic verification gates, bounded retries, and three human-in-the-loop validation points. A domain-specific sentence-transformer maps each attack step to candidate techniques by cosine similarity; we show empirically that this embedding stage, not the surrounding pipeline, is the dominant accuracy bottleneck. We evaluate ThreatForest across seven application domains on a sixteen-dimension rubric, scored by a panel of independent LLM raters with an adversarial verification pass and expert review. Panel-measured quality reaches 0.63-0.68 (on a 0-1 scale) for threat statements, attack trees, and mitigations, but only 0.29 for embedding-only TTP mapping -- a gap stable across all seven domains that isolates the binding constraint. A controlled single-call baseline on the same model more than doubles mapping defensibility, pinning the limitation on the embedding encoder rather than the multi-agent design. To our knowledge, ThreatForest is the first end-to-end system that turns a code repository into TTP-mapped attack trees with evidence-based mitigations across adversary frameworks, with a reusable framework for benchmarking such systems.
It is argued that adversarial vulnerability stems from the absence of boundary verification, a security primitive that enforces explicit validation of data as it crosses inter-agent boundaries, including content, identity, execution intent, and state integrity.
Faisal Haque Bappy, Tahrim Hossain, T. S. Zaman et al.· 0 citations
The proposed Large Language Model-Assisted Threat-Driven Testing System enables security teams, particularly resource-constrained organizations lacking dedicated red-team capabilities, to conduct high-fidelity threat simulation exercises aligned with current adversarial TTPs, without specialized AI expertise, thereby s...
Praise Emeka Nze, A. Ademuwagun, Muktar Bello et al.· Journal of Cyber Security· 0 citations
Compositional Attack Path Scoring (CAPS), a framework engineered to quantify end-to-end multi-hop risks in LLM architectures, establishes a rigorous benchmark for quantitative vulnerability management in complex, agentic LLM environments.
Public reports and open-source resources expose many EDR evasion techniques, but it remains unclear whether commercial Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) systems can withstand these documented attacks. Evaluating them requires turning fragmented security knowledge into working payloads and refining those payloads fr...
Wei Yuan, Wenbo Guo, Qing-Yun Du et al.· 0 citations
This paper introduces a compositional model explaining why no component is catastrophic alone, yet their conjunction can produce correlated destructive action, and separates three population-reach routes from a common core of dormancy, activation, authority, reachable targets, and failed recovery.
Satoshi Matsuoka· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.