Pen-Strategist: A Reasoning Framework for Penetration Testing Strategy Formation and Analysis
Cyber threats are rapidly increasing, expanding their impact from large-scale enterprises to government services and individual users, making robust security systems increasingly essential. However, a significant shortage of skilled cybersecurity professionals exacerbates this challenge. While recent research has explored automating tasks such as penetration testing using LLM-based agents, existing frameworks often perform poorly due to limited capability in strategy formulation, domain-specific
Record details
Published: 6 May 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Military & security · Agents & autonomy
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Agentic AI and the Industrialization of Cyber Offense: Forecast, Consequences, and Defensive Priorities for Enterprises and the Mittelstand
arXiv · 6 May 2026
Defense effectiveness across architectural layers: a mechanistic evaluation of persistent memory attacks on stateful LLM agents
arXiv · 8 May 2026
GRID: Graph Representation of Intelligence Data for Security Text Knowledge Graph Construction
arXiv · 15 May 2026
UNSEEN: A Cross-Stack LLM Unlearning Defense against AR-LLM Social Engineering Attacks
arXiv · 25 April 2026
AI Agents May Always Fall for Prompt Injections
arXiv · 17 May 2026
Surviving the Unseen: Predictive Defense for Novel Multi-Turn Multimodal Attacks
arXiv · 18 May 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (6 May 2026), “Pen-Strategist: A Reasoning Framework for Penetration Testing Strategy Formation and Analysis,” evidence record 4934, https://ethics.ai/record/4934 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.