LLM Penetration Testing for Automated Security Policy Correction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing cybersecurity measures are inadequate to keep pace with the evolving landscape of cyber threats, and penetration testing faces challenges such as disruption of production systems, incomplete threat vector coverage, and the inability to emulate real-world conditions effectively.

Innovation Solution

Leveraging a Large Language Model (LLM) for penetration testing to simulate cyber-attacks, analyze vulnerabilities, and automatically generate security policy updates to address identified threats, thereby enhancing the resilience of network security.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If traditional penetration testing methods are used, then known attack vectors can be tested, but the testing is manual and cannot keep pace with evolving cyber threats

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvepenetration testing speedVSAvoidmanual testing process

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs automated penetration testing where the testing system conducts security assessments against itself and generates its own test cases. The automated system simulates cyberattacks, analyzes vulnerabilities, and creates security policy updates without requiring manual intervention for each testing cycle, thereby maintaining continuous pace with evolving threats.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual mechanical penetration testing processes with an automated computational system. The system uses software-based attack simulation, machine learning algorithms for vulnerability detection, and automated policy generation, substituting human analysts with an automated intelligence system that operates continuously.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Reliability

If comprehensive security testing is performed, then more vulnerabilities can be identified, but production systems may be disrupted

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesecurity coverageVSAvoidsystem disruption

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates virtual copies or sandboxes of production environments to conduct penetration testing. By replicating production systems in isolated test environments, the system can perform comprehensive security assessments without disrupting actual production operations. The test results are then applied to improve production security policies.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The penetration testing is divided into multiple isolated test environments and phases. The system segments the testing process into different sandboxes that can be independently configured and executed, allowing comprehensive testing while maintaining isolation from production systems. This segmentation enables thorough security coverage without system disruption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

3Adaptability or versatility

If existing security policies are used, then implementation is straightforward, but they cannot prevent new variants of attack vectors

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvethreat response capabilityVSAvoidpolicy update process

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements a feedback loop where penetration testing results automatically feed into policy generation and updates. The automated system analyzes test outcomes, identifies successful attack vectors, and generates updated security policies that incorporate lessons learned. This continuous feedback mechanism enables adaptability to new threat variants while automating the policy update process.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary penetration testing and vulnerability analysis before implementing new security policies. By conducting automated security assessments in advance and using the results to pre-generate policy updates, the system prepares security measures proactively rather than reactively, enabling rapid response to new threat variants.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS12603900B2Fully automated pen testing with security policy correction using generative LLM

Publication Date: 2026.04.14 CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC

AI summary

In one aspect, a method for penetration testing for optimization of network security policies is disclosed. The method includes determining, by a security management service, that one or more cybersecurity threats successfully penetrated a security service protecting a pseudo-target in a penetration testing environment, analyzing, by the security management service, the one or more cybersecurity threats that successfully penetrated the security service to characterize the one or more cybersecurity threats, and generating, by the security management service, an update of a policy used by the security service that would prevent the one or more cybersecurity threats from penetrating the security service based on the analysis of the one or cybersecurity threats.