RuleForge: Automated Generation and Validation for Web Vulnerability Detection at Scale

Vulnerability disclosure volumes now far exceed organizational assessment capacity, yet three adjacent research communities (proof-of-concept generation, vulnerability prioritization, and detection rule engineering) operate largely in isolation. Existing automated exploit generation systems report binary pass/fail outcomes, discarding partial progress and producing no signal for the other two communities. This paper presents FORGE, a multi-agent system that bridges these three silos through graduated exploitation depth. Five specialized agents (Intel, Generator, Planner, Exploit, and Detector) execute in a fixed pipeline that (1) generates targeted vulnerable applications from CVE metadata, (2) conducts coached, multi-turn exploitation assessed by an LLM-primary oracle on a four-level taxonomy (L0: no evidence through L3: full compromise), and (3) produces Sigma and Snort detection rules grounded in OpenTelemetry exploitation traces. Graduated depth is the bridging mechanism: deeper exploitation yields richer behavioral traces for detection engineering, while depth data across scoring bands provides ground truth for prioritization validation. A tiered knowledge architecture accumulates intelligence across assessments, transferring build and exploitation experience to subsequent CVEs. Evaluation on 603 CVEs from the CVE-GENIE dataset achieves 67.8% end-to-end L1+ exploitation at USD 1.50 per CVE across eight languages and 187 CWE types. Exploitation rates remain near 68% regardless of EPSS or CVSS band, indicating that pattern-level reachability is orthogonal to metadata-based prioritization. Detection rules from L2+ exploitation achieve significantly higher span-normalized grounding than L1-derived rules (p=0.035), and 93.4% of generated Snort rules produce zero false positives against a synthetic benign corpus.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various cybersecurity tasks, including vulnerability classification, detection, and patching. However, their potential in automated vulnerability report documentation and analysis remains underexplored. We present RAVEN (Retrieval Augmented Vulnerability Exploration Network), a framework leveraging LLM agents and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) to synthesize comprehensive vulnerability analysis reports. Given vulnerable source code, RAVEN generates reports following the Google Project Zero Root Cause Analysis template. The framework uses four modules: an Explorer agent for vulnerability identification, a RAG engine retrieving relevant knowledge from curated databases including Google Project Zero reports and CWE entries, an Analyst agent for impact and exploitation assessment, and a Reporter agent for structured report generation. To ensure quality, RAVEN includes a task specific LLM Judge evaluating reports across structural integrity, ground truth alignment, code reasoning quality, and remediation quality. We evaluate RAVEN on 105 vulnerable code samples covering 15 CWE types from the NIST-SARD dataset. Results show an average quality score of 54.21%, supporting the effectiveness of our approach for automated vulnerability documentation.

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.