SherAgent: Scaling Attack Investigation in the Wild via LLM-Empowered Iterative Query-Filter Backtracking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.09176v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 08:11:10 GMT
• Title: SherAgent: Scaling Attack Investigation in the Wild via LLM-Empowered Iterative Query-Filter Backtracking
• Abstract summary: Provenance-based attack investigation enables viable automation by standardizing data and query logic.<n>We collaborate with the SOC of a major Internet corporation serving billions of users to develop SherAgent.<n>SherAgent operates with remarkable efficiency, incurring under $0.10 in API costs and requiring less than 4 minutes per investigation.
• Score: 32.566471484012276
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Provenance-based attack investigation enables viable automation by standardizing data and query logic; however, it is critically hindered in practice by dependency explosions and fragmented causal chains in the wild. Towards designing a robust and automated investigation tool, we collaborated with the SOC of a major Internet corporation serving billions of users. By engaging in real-world incident response, we are able to evaluate and refine their existing LLM-based investigation workflows, which processes tens of thousands of raw alerts daily, leaving thousands for manual triage, to find out the root causes of investigation failures and major challenges in their existing tools. Motivated by these findings, we propose SherAgent, an LLM-empowered automated investigation system. Operating on an iterative ``query-filter'' backtracking paradigm over provenance graphs, SherAgent leverages the semantic reasoning capabilities of LLMs to process unstructured data, such as investigation context and threat intelligence. To overcome fragmented causal chains caused by missing events, the system dynamically calibrates query conditions to broaden the search scope. Concurrently, it performs precision result filtering and strategic nodes selection for subsequent exploration, thereby mitigating dependency explosions. Extensive evaluations in the wild demonstrate that SherAgent improves the end-to-end investigation success rate by 31.1% and 63.7% compared to both legacy enterprise baselines and SOTA approaches, respectively. Furthermore, it operates with remarkable efficiency, incurring under $0.10 in API costs and requiring less than 4 minutes per investigation. Finally, our user study confirms that SherAgent provides accurate and clear insights, significantly reducing the analytical overhead for security experts.

Related papers

• Staying on the Attack Path: Structured State for Long-Horizon Automated Penetration Testing [17.809156797437208]
  Intentest is an intent-graph-guided automated penetration testing agent.<n>It externalizes long-horizon state from the LLM's context window onto a persistent fact-intent directed acyclic graph.<n>It achieves an overall success rate of 88.2% and a success rate of 75.0% on hard tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T11:09:01Z)
• Breadcrumbing Search Agents [118.20284823674382]
  LLM-based search agents are widely used for information-seeking tasks, but their reliance on external tool returns introduces a critical security risk.<n>We show that the channel delivering search and page observations is a fragile security boundary.<n>Under a constrained tool-intermediary threat model, appending only one controlled result per query can substantially increase attack success.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T07:57:27Z)
• Where Do Deep-Research Agents Go Wrong? Span-Level Error Localization in Agent Trajectories [51.22051230894794]
  Evaluation based on final answers shows whether an agent succeeds, but not which parts of the trajectory make the answer unreliable.<n>We collect 2,790 real trajectories from two agent frameworks, three backbone models, and three benchmarks, convert raw logs into semantic spans, and annotate harmful error spans through expert review.<n>We propose DRIFT, a claim-centric auditing framework that tracks agent claims, checks their support in trajectory evidence, and marks spans where unsupported or conflicting claims affect the answer path.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T10:50:26Z)
• TrajAudit: Automated Failure Diagnosis for Agentic Coding Systems [18.833806809109536]
  Agentic systems have been widely studied to automate software engineering jobs such as bug fixing.<n>Existing automated failure diagnosis approaches leverage task execution trajectories, yet their effectiveness degrades as trajectory length and complexity increase.<n>For repository-level coding tasks specifically, trajectories are laden with noise, such as redundant program structure and verbose code context.<n>We propose TrajAudit, the first failure diagnosis framework for repository-level coding trajectories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T05:24:37Z)
• Towards Agentic Investigation of Security Alerts [0.07646713951724012]
  Security analysts are overwhelmed by the volume of alerts and the low context provided by detection systems.<n>Early-stage investigations typically require manual correlation across multiple log sources.<n>We present an experimental, agentic workflow that leverages large language models (LLMs) augmented with predefined queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-28T16:52:12Z)
• Inference-Time Scaling of Verification: Self-Evolving Deep Research Agents via Test-Time Rubric-Guided Verification [71.98473277917962]
  Recent advances in Deep Research Agents (DRAs) are transforming automated knowledge discovery and problem-solving.<n>We propose an alternative paradigm: self-evolving the agent's ability by iteratively verifying the policy model's outputs, guided by meticulously crafted rubrics.<n>We present DeepVerifier, a rubrics-based outcome reward verifier that leverages the asymmetry of verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T09:47:31Z)
• Empowering RepoQA-Agent based on Reinforcement Learning Driven by Monte-carlo Tree Search [70.63903518295785]
  We introduce RepoSearch-R1, a novel agentic reinforcement learning framework driven by Monte-carlo Tree Search.<n>Based on RepoSearch-R1, we construct a RepoQA-Agent specifically designed for repository question-answering tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-30T09:10:36Z)
• CORTEX: Collaborative LLM Agents for High-Stakes Alert Triage [10.088447487211893]
  Security Operations Centers (SOCs) are overwhelmed by tens of thousands of daily alerts.<n>This overload creates alert fatigue, leading to overlooked threats and analyst burnout.<n>We propose CORTEX, a multi-agent LLM architecture for high-stakes alert triage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T22:09:31Z)
• SafeSearch: Automated Red-Teaming for the Safety of LLM-Based Search Agents [63.70653857721785]
  We conduct two in-the-wild experiments to demonstrate the prevalence of low-quality search results and their potential to misguide agent behaviors.<n>To counter this threat, we introduce an automated red-teaming framework that is systematic, scalable, and cost-efficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-28T07:05:17Z)
• ExCyTIn-Bench: Evaluating LLM agents on Cyber Threat Investigation [15.227180564453016]
  We present ExCyTIn-Bench, the first benchmark to evaluate an LLM agent x on the task of Cyber Threat Investigation.<n>We leverage security logs extracted with expert-crafted detection logic to build threat investigation graphs.<n>We generate questions with LLMs using paired nodes on the graph, taking the start node as background context and the end node as answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T17:06:26Z)
• Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems [50.29939179830491]
  Failure attribution in LLM multi-agent systems remains underexplored and labor-intensive.<n>We develop and evaluate three automated failure attribution methods, summarizing their corresponding pros and cons.<n>The best method achieves 53.5% accuracy in identifying failure-responsible agents but only 14.2% in pinpointing failure steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T23:09:44Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.