incident response teams

Abstract: BACKGROUND: After a software incident, organizations attempt to improve the reliability of their software systems by conducting post-incident analysis and identifying actions to prevent or mitigate similar future incidents. Despite the importance of this activity, there is a limited understanding of the nature and characteristics of the software evolution triggered by the analysis process. AIMS: This study seeks to bridge this gap by providing the first empirical characterization of post-incident software evolution. We aim to establish an understanding of how these changes manifest, specifically focusing on how their characteristics (such as effort, location, and timing) differ from standard maintenance and evolutionary changes. METHOD: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of a 10-year longitudinal dataset from Wikimedia, examining 1,302 tasks and 2,203 code reviews. We categorized these changes across five dimensions: target, effort, abandonment rate, prioritization, and time-to-resolve. RESULTS: Our results show that the post-incident evolution is distinct from other change types. Post-incident changes are more time-consuming, with a median completion time over twice that of other changes and are disproportionately concentrated in a server configuration repository. CONCLUSION: By identifying a few of the characteristics of post-incident evolution, this work provides a foundation for future research into reliability engineering and learning from failure. We highlight further avenues for exploration necessary to fully understand post-incident evolution. Lastly, our work enables researchers to move beyond high-level analysis and begin developing specialized methods and tooling tailored to the nature of post-incident evolution.

Abstract: Detection engineers must translate threat reports, forensic observations, and hunt hypotheses into precise, testable rules. General-purpose large language models (LLMs) can draft such rules, but often produce invalid YAML, incorrect log sources, unsupported fields, or overly broad detection logic. This paper presents \emph{Sigma-Hunter}, a domain-adapted LLM for analyst-assistive Sigma rule generation and threat hunting. We build an instruction-tuning dataset from 3,635 validated open-source Sigma rules, expanded into 7,663 question-answer and analyst-reasoning examples. Each source rule is assigned to a single train, validation, or test partition before this expansion, so no rule leaks across splits. We fine-tune a 7B Mistral model and a Phi-4 model with LoRA and score held-out rule generations on syntax, approximate field consistency, and a semantic judgment of detection logic, completeness, selectivity, and log-source alignment. Sigma-Hunter-Mistral scores 8.17 overall, against 7.88 for the strongest general-purpose baseline and 4.61 for untuned Mistral. Two findings stand out: domain adaptation enables a compact 7B model to perform competitively with larger general-purpose models on this structured task, and syntactic validity is a weak proxy for semantic rule quality, as several baselines emit well-formed YAML carrying weak detection logic. The adapted models run locally, which suits detection engineering in disconnected environments where analysts cannot reach hosted model services.

Abstract: Cyber threat analysis increasingly depends on evidence distributed across vendor advisories, vulnerability databases, and threat intelligence sources. Turning these fragmented observations into timely decisions requires models to connect technical severity with evolving exploitation evidence and available defensive actions. We present POLAR, an LLM-powered framework for synthesizing real-world cyber evidence into threat-centric assessments for prioritization and mitigation. POLAR first disentangles overlapping incidents and grounds each threat in source-linked evidence. For prioritization, it infers severity metrics from cyber evidence and combines the resulting assessment with temporally ordered exploitation signals to estimate near-term exploitation likelihood. For mitigation, it links the synthesized threat data to authoritative remediation knowledge and organizes applicable actions according to threat urgency and operational constraints. We evaluate POLAR on real-world vulnerability evidence collected from public resources and compare it with multiple baselines. Across heterogeneous incidents and zero-day settings, POLAR improves threat ranking and mitigation retrieval while producing evidence-linked intermediate assessments that support analyst inspection. The results establish evidence synthesis as a practical foundation for LLM-based cyber decision support across related security tasks.

Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly explored for root cause analysis (RCA) in microservice systems, yet empirical guidance on how to design and combine their tools remains limited. We conduct a controlled empirical study of tool abstraction and composition across models and microservice environments. We implement 24 structured tools for metric access (L1), evidence analysis (L2), and diagnosis (L3), alongside a Python-based reference setting (L0). Using 375 failure cases from three microservice systems, we evaluate eight configurations with Qwen3.7-Plus and compare four Qwen models on a shared subset of four configurations. Our results show that tool configurations affect root cause localization and failure type identification differently. With Qwen3.7-Plus, L3 achieves 82.8% top-1 localization accuracy compared with 85.4% for L0, while requiring less than half the time per case. Adding tool levels can improve type identification while reducing localization accuracy. Trajectory analysis reveals cases in which agents override correct diagnostic recommendations after consulting additional evidence. Model choice also changes tool benefits: adding L3 to L1+L2 improves diagnosis for three models but hurts Qwen3-8B, which rarely invokes L3. Tool configuration rankings further change across microservice systems. These findings provide an empirical foundation for designing and using RCA tools, guiding tool selection and composition according to the model, diagnostic objective, and target system.

Abstract: Leading AI developers have reported agents acting beyond their approved limits, which a United Nations panel described as an early warning of loss of human control. Yet incident reports and agent-safety evaluations describe these events differently, making it difficult to compare failures, trace risk across attempts, or separate agent behavior from the environment's role in allowing an out-of-scope action to succeed. To address this gap, we introduce a common framework in which each attempt ends in approved completion, safe stopping, scope escape, or continuation. We formalize the framework as a discrete-time competing-hazards model and derive escape probability within a retry budget, a model-conditional safe-budget limit, and conditions for estimation from execution logs. We audit 22 incident reports and 102 agent-safety evaluations published from January 2025 to September 2026 using primary sources. Six incidents involved tasks that could not be completed within scope, thirteen involved agents that continued rather than stopped, and five did not report stopping behavior. Developers' figures imply a task-level incidence ratio near 47 for out-of-scope coordination in never-solved versus solved tasks. Among evaluations, 87 recorded an out-of-scope effect or specification violation, 26 treated safe stopping as a first-class outcome, only 20 recorded both, and 79 merged budget exhaustion with failure. In 20 of 22 incidents, the environment allowed an out-of-scope effect, indicating that realized loss of control often reflected persistent agent behavior interacting with permissive boundary conditions; meanwhile, no evaluation reported all fields needed to estimate the full competing-hazards process from published evidence.

Abstract: Security Operations Centers (SOCs) process large volumes of alerts daily. Alert triage prioritizes high-risk threats while reducing manual review of benign alerts. LLM agents can reason over logs and threat intelligence, but struggle to keep aligned with organization-specific, rapidly evolving SOC operational standards. We introduce REFINE, an LLM-agent framework for enterprise alert triage. REFINE encodes analyst expertise as structured skills and continuously adapts using analyst disposition feedback. It enforces recall = 1.0 as a hard constraint during evolution to maximize auto-closure of false positives, and identifies judgment blind spots by combining alert distributions with model error boundaries. Evaluated on four real industrial SOC scenarios across four MITRE ATT&CK phases with temporal split: REFINE achieves recall=1.0 on all evolution sets. On future test windows, it retains recall=1.0 in three scenarios; the degraded case reaches 0.807 recall, still outperforming self-evolution baselines (0.49-0.58).

Abstract: Modern cybersecurity operations rely on CTI collected from heterogeneous sources, including semi-structured threat representations, IoCs, and narrative technical reports. However, these artifacts are often insufficient in isolation to reconstruct how an attack unfolds, under which conditions each step is feasible, and which traces it leaves behind. In practice, analysts must manually correlate partial evidence scattered across multiple and only partially structured sources, delaying the design of effective prevention, detection, and response actions. To address this gap, we propose an automated pipeline that derives an actionable representation of a cyberattack from heterogeneous CTI sources. The pipeline combines a RAG architecture with a locally deployable SLM, used to consolidate such evidence and infer missing operational details. Starting from a semi-structured threat representation and auxiliary CTI documents, the pipeline produces an enriched Attack Graph that captures a coarse, tactic-aligned progression of the attack and annotates each step with explicit pre-conditions and post-conditions, and an enriched description. This representation supports prevention by exposing execution requirements, detection by highlighting observable traces, and response by clarifying the temporal progression of the attack. Then, due to the lack of validated datasets with ground-truth information on the temporal evolution of real-world attacks, we test the complete pipeline on 10 real-world case studies spanning multiple threat types, including backdoors and staged downloaders delivered via phishing. A manual assessment across 10 real-world case studies provides initial evidence that the generated graphs are consistent with expected attack progressions, indicating that the proposed approach can support analysts by consolidating dispersed CTI evidence into a structured and actionable view of attacks.