From Threat Intelligence to Firewall Rules: Semantic Relations in Hybrid AI Agent and Expert System Architectures

Cyber threat intelligence (CTI) is increasingly consumed not by human analysts but by LLM agents that compose multi-step investigations at query time. The harness side of this shift has matured rapidly, but the corpus side has not: threat reports and vulnerability databases are still packaged for retrieval-augmented generation, as opaque chunks behind an embedding index. We argue that this substrate, not model capability, is the bottleneck on agentic CTI investigation, and present CTIFoundry, an agent-native corpus scaffold. At build time, CTIFoundry materializes the latent structure of a CTI corpus: a deterministic ontology graph over four authoritative knowledge bases (CVE, CWE, CAPEC, ATT&CK) whose official cross-references become typed, traversable edges; a span-grounded report layer whose canonical, alias-resolved cross-vendor entities index provenance-carrying chunks; and hybrid dense+lexical retrieval surfaces. At query time this structure is exposed through seven typed tools and three procedural skills mounted on a stock, widely-used open-source agent harness. On the public CTIConnect benchmark, swapping only the action surface lifts the identically-harnessed agent from 0.610 to 0.829 overall F1 with gpt-5.4 and from 0.470 to 0.745 with claude-haiku-4-5: a small model on CTIFoundry surpasses a flagship model on the flat substrate. The scaffolded agent is simultaneously more accurate and more efficient: on both Claude models it answers with roughly half the tool calls per question. The ablation distills design principles for matching corpus scaffolding to data modality, in CTI and beyond. Build-time validation guarantees zero fabricated identifiers by construction, and the scaffold sustains 1,168 investigations end-to-end at about 2.6 cents each.

Signature-based Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) detect malicious activity by matching network or host events against predefined rules. Security analysts manually develop these rules from Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI). As threats evolve, this manual pipeline faces two bottlenecks. Before authoring a new rule, an analyst must reconcile the incoming CTI with the existing rule base and determine whether to create, update, or retire one. This process is challenging due to the representational differences between the CTI and Rule formats. This gap limits the effectiveness of keyword- and embedding-based search, making rule reconciliation cognitively demanding and, in turn, contributing to "rule bloat". Second, automated verification of a new rule is inherently difficult as zero-day threats lack ground truth from simulated testing. Hence, standard metrics cannot prove that a rule semantically adheres to the CTI, and the use of LLMs leads to non-deterministic behavior. To address these challenges, we introduce FALCON, an agentic framework for CTI-grounded rule retrieval, generation, and validation. At its core, a novel CTI-Rule semantic scorer, quantifies the functional alignment between a CTI and a rule; the same signal drives a retriever that surfaces relevant deployed rules and a ground-truth-free validator that scores generated ones. Around it, a generation pipeline produces deployable rules from CTI in real time and refines them through self-reflective syntactic, semantic, and performance validators. Across network (Snort) and host-based (YARA) platforms on a purpose-built CTI-Rule dataset, FALCON attains a mean relevance of 0.72 (approx), with 84% inter-rater agreement among cybersecurity analysts, underscoring the promise of real-time security automation.

AI agents increasingly take consequential actions -- shell commands, cloud operations, and arbitrary tool-calls -- so a trust layer must decide, per action, whether to allow, warn, block, or escalate. We argue that the right way to reason about such a layer is by threat type. Lexical (fixed-signature) threats, where danger lives in a stable token, are decidable by deterministic rules; semantic (intent-dependent) threats, where a benign and a malicious action share the same surface, are out of reach for rules by construction. We make this concrete with a negative proof: a determined, hand-authored cloud rule pack lifts held-out accuracy only 48 to 56% overall and moves the semantic categories by 0pp (data_db 29 to 29, observability 59 to 59, supply_chain 50 to 50), while a strong LLM judge carries exactly those categories. We give the judge a self-learning capability: on a corpus that is mainly semantic attacks it nearly doubles rule accuracy (48% to 83.6-85.2%) with near-zero false-blocks, and this holds across two model providers. We turn this into a self-improving dual-store system: the judge distills a growing deterministic rule floor on lexical threats (cheaper over time) and feeds a guarded RAG memory on semantic threats (a verdict-cache fails -- surface-twins collapse to ~58% -- so a corroboration guard lifts semantic accuracy +13pp, 70 to 84). The result is what sets AgentTrust v2 apart from its static v1 predecessor: a trust layer that self-evolves from its own stream of decisions -- cheaper on the lexical class (it distils its own rules) and smarter on the semantic class (it accrues guarded precedent), while never hard-blocking a benign action. An end-to-end online replay shows the judge-call rate falling (50% to 44%) and judge-domain accuracy rising (71% to 80%), with 0 benign hard-blocks across 45,000 actions.