Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response
A SOC analyst receives correlated evidence from intake, enrichment, threat, asset, identity, and response-recommendation agents. Deterministic policy gates and scoped adapters keep consequential response under human control.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response system boundary
Alert intake fans out bounded enrichment to asset, identity, and threat-context agents. Correlation and risk classification produce an incident brief before analyst review and scoped response adapters.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response execution path
SIEM, EDR, and cloud alerts enter deduplication, enrichment runs in parallel, correlation assembles evidence, a recommendation agent proposes response, and a SOC analyst approves consequential actions unless policy explicitly configures otherwise.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response context movement
Each agent receives only alert identifiers and the context needed for its role. The incident record stores source provenance, enrichment results, correlation, risk rationale, analyst decision, and response history.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response ownership limits
Agents cannot change policy, access unrestricted secrets, or execute consequential response without the configured analyst gate. Read-only enrichment is the default.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response enforced controls
Connectors, deduplication, policy gates, scoped action adapters, secrets storage, rate limits, idempotency, immutable audit, and approval state are deterministic.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response trust boundaries
Secrets isolation, least-privilege connectors, evidence provenance, role-based analyst access, scoped response tools, immutable audit events, and rate limits constrain the system.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response operating model
Priority queues, parallel enrichment, alert deduplication, incident correlation, backpressure, provider rate limits, and analyst escalation prevent alert volume from overwhelming downstream systems.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response recovery paths
Unavailable enrichment sources are marked missing, duplicate alerts join an incident, provider failures retry within budget, uncertain classifications escalate, and partial response requires analyst reconciliation.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response deterministic test coverage
Tests cover connector contracts, deduplication, evidence provenance, correlation, policy gates, unauthorized response, rate limits, approval, adapter failure, and audit integrity.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response behavior evaluation
Agent evaluations assess enrichment relevance, correlation consistency, risk rationale, unsupported claims, escalation, and recommendation quality without replacing analyst judgment.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response operational evidence
SOC operators see queue pressure, connector health, enrichment latency, correlation traces, recommendation versions, analyst decisions, adapter calls, and immutable response records.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response deployment boundaries
Read-only enrichment workers, policy services, incident storage, analyst console, and response adapters deploy with separated credentials and independently restricted network access.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response deliberate constraints
Human approval can delay response but protects consequential actions. Automated execution is limited to explicitly configured scope, while the analyst remains accountable for broader response.
Multi-Agent Cybersecurity Triage and Response claim boundary
Illustrative security operations architecture only. No detection rate, response-time result, customer deployment, or security certification is claimed.
Need this architecture adapted to your workflow?
DeepVention Labs can map the requirements, boundaries, integrations, evaluation, and operating model for your system.