AGIR: Automating Cyber Threat Intelligence Reporting with Natural Language Generation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) reporting is pivotal in contemporary risk management strategies. As the volume of CTI reports continues to surge, the demand for automated tools to streamline report generation becomes increasingly apparent. While Natural Language Processing techniques have shown potential in handling text data, they often struggle to address the complexity of diverse data sources and their intricate interrelationships. Moreover, established paradigms like STIX have emerged as de facto standards within the CTI community, emphasizing the formal categorization of entities and relations to facilitate consistent data sharing. In this paper, we introduce AGIR (Automatic Generation of Intelligence Reports), a transformative Natural Language Generation tool specifically designed to address the pressing challenges in the realm of CTI reporting. AGIR's primary objective is to empower security analysts by automating the labor-intensive task of generating comprehensive intelligence reports from formal representations of entity graphs. AGIR utilizes a two-stage pipeline by combining the advantages of template-based approaches and the capabilities of Large Language Models such as ChatGPT. We evaluate AGIR's report generation capabilities both quantitatively and qualitatively. The generated reports accurately convey information expressed through formal language, achieving a high recall value (0.99) without introducing hallucination. Furthermore, we compare the fluency and utility of the reports with state-of-the-art approaches, showing how AGIR achieves higher scores in terms of Syntactic Log-Odds Ratio (SLOR) and through questionnaires. By using our tool, we estimate that the report writing time is reduced by more than 40%, therefore streamlining the CTI production of any organization and contributing to the automation of several CTI tasks.
Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2023.
Builds on
6 of 33 references.
References · 6
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
- 2017Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core tasks, applications and evaluationcited by 206
- 2018Sentence-Level Fluency Evaluation: References Help, But Can Be Spared!cited by 43
- 2021Generating Fake Cyber Threat Intelligence Using Transformer-Based Modelscited by 28
- 2023STIXnet: A Novel and Modular Solution for Extracting All STIX Objects in CTI Reportscited by 10
- 2019Automated email Generation for Targeted Attacks using Natural Languagecited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 7; 2026: 3.
15 papers.
Sort:
By area:
- 2024When LLMs Meet Cybersecurity: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 70
- 2024Transformers and Large Language Models for Efficient Intrusion Detection Systems: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 21
- 2025ExCyTIn-Bench: Evaluating LLM agents on Cyber Threat Investigationcited by 15
- 2025Large Language Models for Security Operations Centers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 9
- 2024Integrating Large Language Models with Internet of Things Applicationscited by 7
- 2024ProveRAG: Provenance-Driven Vulnerability Analysis with Automated Retrieval-Augmented LLMscited by 6
- 2025Large Language Models Are Unreliable for Cyber Threat Intelligencecited by 5
- 2025Benchmarking LLM-Assisted Blue Teaming via Standardized Threat Huntingcited by 4
- 2024On the use of neurosymbolic AI for defending against cyber attackscited by 3
- 2025From Texts to Shields: Convergence of Large Language Models and Cybersecuritycited by 3
- 2025LLM Embedding-based Attribution (LEA): Quantifying Source Contributions to Generative Model's Response for Vulnerability Analysiscited by 2
- 2026CyberThreat-Eval: Can Large Language Models Automate Real-World Threat Research?cited by 2
3 more
- 2026Reasoning Topology Matters: A Controlled Study of LLM-Based Cybersecurity Analysis21 Sep 2026
- 2026GenTI: Benchmarking LLMs for Autonomous IDPS Rule Generation for Unseen Attacks4 Jun 2026
- 2026CyberThreat-Eval: Can Large Language Models Automate Real-World Threat Research?10 Mar 2026
- 2025Generation of Programmatic Rules for Document Forgery Detection Using Large Language Models22 Dec 2025
- 2025Benchmarking LLM-Assisted Blue Teaming via Standardized Threat Hunting28 Sep 2025
- 2025Large Language Models for Security Operations Centers: A Comprehensive Survey13 Sep 2025
- 2025ExCyTIn-Bench: Evaluating LLM agents on Cyber Threat Investigation14 Jul 2025
- 2025LLM Embedding-based Attribution (LEA): Quantifying Source Contributions to Generative Model's Response for Vulnerability Analysis12 Jun 2025
- 2025From Texts to Shields: Convergence of Large Language Models and Cybersecurity1 May 2025
- 2025Large Language Models Are Unreliable for Cyber Threat Intelligence29 Mar 2025
- 2024Integrating Large Language Models with Internet of Things Applications25 Oct 2024
- 2024ProveRAG: Provenance-Driven Vulnerability Analysis with Automated Retrieval-Augmented LLMs22 Oct 2024
- 2024When LLMs Meet Cybersecurity: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 70
- 2024Transformers and Large Language Models for Efficient Intrusion Detection Systems: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 21
- 2025Large Language Models for Security Operations Centers: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 9
- 2024Integrating Large Language Models with Internet of Things Applicationscited by 7
- 2025Large Language Models Are Unreliable for Cyber Threat Intelligencecited by 5
- 2025Benchmarking LLM-Assisted Blue Teaming via Standardized Threat Huntingcited by 4
- 2024On the use of neurosymbolic AI for defending against cyber attackscited by 3
- 2025From Texts to Shields: Convergence of Large Language Models and Cybersecuritycited by 3
- 2025LLM Embedding-based Attribution (LEA): Quantifying Source Contributions to Generative Model's Response for Vulnerability Analysiscited by 2
- 2026CyberThreat-Eval: Can Large Language Models Automate Real-World Threat Research?cited by 2
- 2025Generation of Programmatic Rules for Document Forgery Detection Using Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026GenTI: Benchmarking LLMs for Autonomous IDPS Rule Generation for Unseen Attackscited by 0
- 2026GenTI: Benchmarking LLMs for Autonomous IDPS Rule Generation for Unseen Attacks4 Jun 2026
- 2026CyberThreat-Eval: Can Large Language Models Automate Real-World Threat Research?10 Mar 2026
- 2025Generation of Programmatic Rules for Document Forgery Detection Using Large Language Models22 Dec 2025
- 2025Benchmarking LLM-Assisted Blue Teaming via Standardized Threat Hunting28 Sep 2025
- 2025Large Language Models for Security Operations Centers: A Comprehensive Survey13 Sep 2025
- 2025LLM Embedding-based Attribution (LEA): Quantifying Source Contributions to Generative Model's Response for Vulnerability Analysis12 Jun 2025
- 2025From Texts to Shields: Convergence of Large Language Models and Cybersecurity1 May 2025
- 2025Large Language Models Are Unreliable for Cyber Threat Intelligence29 Mar 2025
- 2024Integrating Large Language Models with Internet of Things Applications25 Oct 2024
- 2024Transformers and Large Language Models for Efficient Intrusion Detection Systems: A Comprehensive Survey14 Aug 2024
- 2024On the use of neurosymbolic AI for defending against cyber attacks9 Aug 2024
- 2024When LLMs Meet Cybersecurity: A Systematic Literature Review6 May 2024