An Agentic Multi-Agent Architecture for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Organizations: BigCommerce · Lead Software Engineer, BigCommerce; IEEE Senior Member · University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA · Microsoft ·
Abstract
Getting a real cybersecurity risk assessment for a small organization is expensive -- a NIST CSF-aligned engagement runs $15,000 on the low end, takes weeks, and depends on practitioners who are genuinely scarce. Most small companies skip it entirely. We built a six-agent AI system where each agent handles one analytical stage: profiling the organization, mapping assets, analyzing threats, evaluating controls, scoring risks, and generating recommendations. Agents share a persistent context that grows as the assessment proceeds, so later agents build on what earlier ones concluded -- the mechanism that distinguishes this from standard sequential agent pipelines. We tested it on a 15-person HIPAA-covered healthcare company and compared outputs to independent assessments by three CISSP practitioners -- the system agreed with them 85% of the time on severity classifications, covered 92% of identified risks, and finished in under 15 minutes. We then ran 30 repeated single-agent assessments across five synthetic but sector-realistic organizational profiles in healthcare, fintech, manufacturing, retail, and SaaS, comparing a general-purpose Mistral-7B against a domain fine-tuned model. Both completed every run. The fine-tuned model flagged threats the baseline could not see at all: PHI exposure in healthcare, OT/IIoT vulnerabilities in manufacturing, platform-specific risks in retail. The full multi-agent pipeline, however, failed every one of 30 attempts on a Tesla T4 with its 4,096-token default context window -- context capacity, not model quality, turned out to be the binding constraint.
Figures & tables
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of Security Policies | High | High |
| Insufficient Authentication Controls | High | Medium |
| Inadequate Incident Response Plan | High | High |
| Data Security & Privacy | High | High |
| Unsecured Firewall Configuration | Medium | High |
| Insufficient Cloud Security Controls | Medium | Medium |
| Sector | Mistral-7B (baseline) | FT-CyberSec (domain) |
|---|---|---|
| Healthcare | Unauthorized Access, Data Breach, Malware Infection | Unsecured PHI , Unpatched FHIR Integrations , Insufficient Authentication |
| Fintech | Unauthorized Access, Data Breach, Insecure Third-Party Vendors | Unauthorized Access to PII, Data Breach (Insufficient Controls), Denial of Service |
| Mfg. | Unauthorized Access, Data Breach, Malware Infection | Unpatched Windows AD , OT/IIoT Sensor Vulnerabilities , Insufficient Segmentation |
| Retail | Unauthorized Access, Data Breach, Phishing Attacks | Unpatched Vulns in Shopify , Insufficient Controls for AWS , Phishing Attacks |
| SaaS | Unauthorized Access, Data Leakage, Insecure Code | Unauthorized Access to PII, Data Breach (Insufficient Measures), DoS Attack |
Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity develops methods to protect digital and cyber-physical systems from attacks, vulnerabilities, data loss, and misuse.
See all 354 papers