AI Cyber Defense / Network detection, DNS and egress analytics
AI Cyber Defense: Combine network signals into a defensible incident hypothesis
Create a case hypothesis with supporting and contradicting observations. Require an analyst to resolve uncertain attribution before disruptive containment unless impact demands emergency action.
Environment and inputs: Network detection and response using resolver logs, proxy metadata, flow records and optional Zeek or Suricata sensors.
Scenario and goal
Several weak signals can matter together, but correlation can also combine unrelated activity behind shared infrastructure.
Why it matters
For this scenario, expect behavior to vary across destinations, timing and client software. Network metadata supports a hypothesis, while endpoint and identity records often explain the actor and purpose. Account for encryption, sampling and sensor placement before interpreting absence. A statistical anomaly, protocol fingerprint or unfamiliar domain should remain a supporting observation until its consequence and business context are established.
Evidence to collect
Join signals on stable host or identity keys within a documented window, preserving each event's provenance and confidence.
Validate with an authorized exercise
Replay one coherent synthetic event chain and an unrelated shared-IP chain; confirm only the coherent case joins automatically and the ambiguous chain keeps its uncertainty.
Rollout and checks
Preserve event time, source tuple, sensor identity and the original record identifier for every decisive observation. Verify clock alignment and collection health before joining sources. Compare a representative benign workload with the suspected behavior in a lab or stored-event replay. Adjust a detection only after documenting which observed distinction justifies the change.
Scope and limits
This guide proposes a defensive test; it is not a tested production design. Check platform support and local requirements. References explain the mechanisms but do not certify the design. Behavior alone does not prove AI involvement.