ThreatForest: Multi-Agent Attack Tree Generation with Pluggable TTP Framework Mapping
Authors: Cristian Leo, Anton Dykyi, Danny Cortegaca, Daniel Begimher, Prakash Jha
Organizations: Amazon Web Services, Inc., 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, WA, 98109, United States · Amazon Web Services EMEA SARL, UK Branch, 1 Principal Place, Worship Street, London, EC2A 2FA, United Kingdom
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.
Mapping observed system behavior to standardized frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK is essential for threat-informed defense, but remains largely manual. Existing automated methods depend on Cyber Threat Intelligence reports, which offer only retrospective accounts of attacks. Low-level telemetry, i.e. kernel-level system calls, instead provides evidence of adversary behavior, yet its volume and complexity have limited its use for automated mapping. We present a methodology that collects kernel-level events via eBPF, correlates attacker commands into a provenance graph, and derives compact graph representations suitable for LLM-based reasoning. These representations are mapped to the MITRE ATT&CK framework using both pure LLM prompting and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounded in the ATT&CK knowledge base, producing ranked technique candidates along with supporting rationales. We implement this methodology as an end-to-end pipeline, named Trace2ATT&CK and evaluate it on 347 Linux Atomic Red Team tests using locally deployed open-weights LLMs. RAG consistently improves ATT&CK mapping performance over pure prompting, while provenance graph substantially outperforms raw telemetry. These results show that local inference over graph-based behavioral descriptions can make automated ATT&CK mapping from kernel-level telemetry operationally viable, without compromising data confidentiality.
Matteo Lupinacci, Luigi Arena, Francesco Blefari +1
We introduce the Cyber Defense Benchmark, a benchmark for measuring how well large language model (LLM) agents perform the core SOC analyst task of threat hunting: given a database of raw Windows event logs with no guided questions or hints, identify the exact timestamps of malicious events. The benchmark wraps 106 real attack procedures from the OTRF Security-Datasets corpus - spanning 86 MITRE ATT&CK sub-techniques across 12 tactics - into a Gymnasium reinforcement-learning environment. Each episode presents the agent with an in-memory SQLite database of 75,000-135,000 log records produced by a deterministic campaign simulator that time-shifts and entity-obfuscates the raw recordings. The agent must iteratively submit SQL queries to discover malicious event timestamps and explicitly flag them, scored CTF-style against Sigma-rule-derived ground truth. Evaluating five frontier models - Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Kimi K2.5, and Gemini 3 Flash - on 26 campaigns covering 105 of 106 procedures, we find that all models fail dramatically: the best model (Claude Opus 4.6) submits correct flags for only 3.8% of malicious events on average, and no run across any model ever finds all flags. We define a passing score as >= 50% recall on every ATT&CK tactic - the minimum bar for unsupervised SOC deployment. No model passes: the leader clears this bar on 5 of 13 tactics and the remaining four on zero. These results suggest that current LLMs are poorly suited for open-ended, evidence-driven threat hunting despite strong performance on curated Q&A security benchmarks.
LLMs are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents with access to tools, databases, and external services, yet practitioners (across different sectors) lack systematic methods to assess how known threat classes translate into concrete risks within a specific agentic deployment. We present MATRA, a pragmatic threat modeling framework for agentic AI systems that adapts established risk assessment methodology to systematically assess how known LLM threats translate into deployment-specific risks. MATRA begins with an asset-based impact assessment and utilizes attack trees to determine the likelihood of these impacts occurring within the system architecture. We demonstrate MATRA on a personal AI agent deployment using OpenClaw, quantifying how architectural controls such as network sandboxing and least-privilege access reduce risk by limiting the blast radius of successful injections.
Tim Van hamme, Thomas Vissers, Javier Carnerero-Cano +4