PARTNERS

Add selected Workbench capabilities through bounded OEM and partner integrations

Threat Canvas for Jira and Confluence

Turn AI system models into Jira-ready security work and Confluence evidence.

Use Threat Canvas to model AI architecture, trust boundaries, flows, risks, controls, and ownership—then turn approved outcomes into Jira-ready remediation and Confluence-ready security design records.

HOW DOES THE THREAT MODEL BECOME ENGINEERING WORK?

AI product launch review

Structure design review for an AI-enabled release and preserve the risks, controls, owners, and review decisions required by the release gate.

RAG application threat model

Model retrieval components, data flows, identities, authorization boundaries, provenance controls, and candidate abuse scenarios.

SaaS architecture review

Model tenant boundaries, external providers, identity transitions, data movement, agent actions, and control ownership.

Secure design review before release

Turn design-level security decisions into assigned remediation work and a durable review record.

Compliance and assurance evidence

Produce reviewed design evidence that can support SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, customer review, and internal assurance without claiming that the canvas itself certifies compliance.

Threat Canvas

AI System Threat Model

STRIDEDFD

User Browser

External Entity

LLM Gateway

AI Process

RAG Pipeline

AI Process

Vector Store

Data Store

Tool Executor

Process

Audit Log

Data Store

Trust boundary: AI inference layer

Identified risks

Prompt injection via user input

HIGH

Retrieval context leakage

MED

Excessive agent permissions

HIGH

Audit log tampering

LOW

4 risks · 2 controls mapped · Jira-ready

Live demo

Core capabilities

What Threat Canvas for Jira and Confluence does.

System and flow model

Represent external entities, applications, models, data stores, retrieval systems, agents, tools, trust zones, flows, and risks in a structured canvas.

Threat discovery

Apply STRIDE-compatible and AI-specific threat patterns to the modeled components, boundaries, and flows.

AI application templates

Start from structured patterns for model gateways, RAG pipelines, tool calls, agent actions, memory, provider boundaries, and consequential outputs.

Jira work generation

Create structured remediation work containing component context, affected flow, severity, owner, recommended control, and evidence requirements.

Confluence design records

Publish a readable security design record containing the model, risks, controls, decisions, open work, evidence, and reviewer sign-off.

Trust-boundary modeling

Show where identity, authorization, data classification, privilege, ownership, logging, or external dependency requirements change.

The problem

Threat models should drive engineering work and preserve decisions.

Threat modeling is too often trapped in workshops, whiteboards, and stale diagrams. Engineering teams need clear Jira work. Security teams need review evidence. Leaders need a readable risk picture.

Diagrams go stale

Architecture changes quickly. Threat models require ownership, linked work, and review state to remain useful.

Tickets lose context

Security tickets lose value when they no longer explain the component, flow, trust boundary, precondition, or control decision that produced them.

Design decisions lose their evidence

Security, assurance, and customer review require a durable record of what was modeled, what was accepted, what changed, and what remains open.

AI systems make it harder

Modern AI products add flows and failure modes that traditional architecture diagrams do not capture: prompt construction, retrieved context, model provider boundaries, tool calls, agent actions, memory reads, and side-effect outputs.

  • Prompt injection via user and retrieved content
  • Retrieval context leakage across tenants
  • Excessive agency from tool-enabled agents
  • Unsafe output handling and data exfiltration
  • Model provider trust boundary violations
  • Audit log gaps and side-effect traceability

Outcomes

From connected model to engineering action.

01

Model the system and its flows

Sketch your architecture as a system and flow canvas: external entities, processes, data stores, trust boundaries, and flows.

02

Identify risks and candidate abuse scenarios

STRIDE-compatible threat discovery across every flow and boundary. AI systems get first-class templates for prompt injection, retrieval leakage, and excessive agency.

03

Assign controls, owners, and evidence requirements

Attach mitigations, ownership, and evidence expectations directly to the relevant components, flows, boundaries, and scenarios.

04

Create Jira-ready remediation work

Convert risks into structured Jira issues with context, severity, ownership, and remediation guidance — not vague risk language.

05

Publish the Confluence-ready design record

Export a Confluence-ready security design record with controls, evidence, risk summary, and reviewer sign-off.

Designed for Jira and Confluence workflows

Built for the tools your teams already use.

Threat models that live inside Jira and Confluence stay connected to engineering work. Risks become tickets. Decisions become design records. Evidence is always traceable to the model that produced it.

Confluence

  • Security design record page
  • Threat model snapshot and summary
  • Control and evidence tables
  • Architecture reviewer sign-off
  • Living document — updates with the model

Jira

  • Risk-to-ticket with full context
  • Severity, component, and owner fields
  • Linked back to the canvas model
  • Remediation guidance in description
  • Tracks to sprint and release

Who benefits

Security teams

Auditable evidence of design review, control coverage, and risk disposition.

Engineers

Clear Jira tickets with architectural context and remediation guidance — not abstract risk language.

Engineering managers

A prioritized security backlog that connects to sprints and release gates.

Leaders and auditors

An executive risk summary and a structured record of threat modeling decisions.

Compliance teams

Design-time evidence for SOC 2, ISO 27001, and ISO 42001 controls without a heavyweight GRC system.

AI systems

Threat modeling for RAG, agents, and AI-enabled products.

AI-specific risk surfaces

AI systems introduce new flows and failure modes that normal architecture diagrams do not capture. The canvas has first-class support for every layer of the modern AI stack.

Prompt construction layer

Prompt injection, template injection, context manipulation

Retrieval / RAG pipeline

Context leakage, cross-tenant retrieval, poisoning

LLM gateway and model providers

Trust boundary violations, model substitution

Tool calls and agent actions

Excessive agency, unsafe tool permissions

Memory and session state

State poisoning, session fixation, replay attacks

Output handling and side effects

Data exfiltration, unsafe code execution, SSRF

Audit and observability layer

Log tampering, traceability gaps, evidence loss

The canvas treats AI systems as first-class threat model subjects. Pre-built templates surface the risk taxonomy for LLM applications, RAG pipelines, and agent-enabled products — so teams do not start from a blank STRIDE spreadsheet.

AI template

LLM gateway review

Map prompt flows, system prompt exposure, user trust levels, and output routing. Identify prompt injection and model substitution risks.

AI template

RAG pipeline model

Canvas the retrieval path: query, embedding, vector store, context window, and response. Surface leakage and poisoning exposure.

AI template

Agent threat model

Model agent tool permissions, action chains, memory reads, and side effects. Identify excessive agency and unsafe tool use.

AI template

AI product launch review

Full pre-launch threat model with Jira remediation backlog and Confluence evidence record. Evidence of security review before ship.

Framework alignment

AI risk templates align with OWASP LLM Top 10, MITRE ATLAS AI adversarial techniques, and NIST AI RMF governance controls — so evidence produced connects to the frameworks your buyers and auditors already reference.

OWASP LLM Top 10
MITRE ATLAS
NIST AI RMF
ISO 42001

Features

What Threat Canvas adds to Jira and Confluence workflows.

System and flow model

Represent external entities, applications, models, data stores, retrieval systems, agents, tools, trust zones, flows, and risks in a structured canvas.

Threat discovery

Apply STRIDE-compatible and AI-specific threat patterns to the modeled components, boundaries, and flows.

AI application templates

Start from structured patterns for model gateways, RAG pipelines, tool calls, agent actions, memory, provider boundaries, and consequential outputs.

Jira work generation

Create structured remediation work containing component context, affected flow, severity, owner, recommended control, and evidence requirements.

Confluence design records

Publish a readable security design record containing the model, risks, controls, decisions, open work, evidence, and reviewer sign-off.

Trust-boundary modeling

Show where identity, authorization, data classification, privilege, ownership, logging, or external dependency requirements change.

Workflow

Threat modeling in one flow.

1

Import or sketch architecture

Start from an existing Confluence diagram, an architecture description, or draw the system from scratch on the canvas.

2

Mark trust boundaries and data classes

Define perimeters, privilege zones, and data sensitivity across every flow and storage layer.

3

Generate or review threats

Use STRIDE templates and AI-assisted threat generation to identify risks, or walk through the model manually.

4

Map controls and evidence

Attach existing controls, record gaps, and link to test results or audit evidence directly on the canvas.

5

Create Jira issues

Convert open risks into Jira tickets with full context: component, flow, severity, owner, and recommended remediation.

6

Publish the Confluence design record

Export a structured security design document to Confluence. Living models update as the architecture evolves.

Differentiation

A threat model that stays connected to work and evidence.

Threat Canvas connects components, flows, boundaries, risks, controls, owners, remediation work, and evidence state. The objective is not another drawing. It is a living security decision record that engineering teams can act on.

vs. Diagramming tools

Diagrams do not drive remediation. There is no risk registry, no Jira integration, and no evidence output. They produce pictures, not work.

vs. GRC platforms

GRC systems are too heavy for design-time product security. They track compliance programs, not architecture-level threat models.

vs. AI chatbots

A chatbot generates threat ideas without durable context. There is no canvas, no trust boundary model, no Jira output, and no evidence record.

vs. Spreadsheets

Spreadsheets do not connect risks to architecture. They go stale immediately and produce no Jira work or Confluence evidence.

What makes it different

Structured security data-flow canvas — not a whiteboard, not a chat window.

Risks are linked to specific components, flows, and trust boundaries in the model.

Jira issues carry full canvas context: component, flow, severity, and remediation.

Confluence records are generated from the model, not written from scratch.

Evidence is always traceable back to the threat model that produced it.

Living models update as architecture evolves — not a one-time snapshot.

Use cases

Where security teams deploy it.

Use case

AI product launch review

Structure design review for an AI-enabled release and preserve the risks, controls, owners, and review decisions required by the release gate.

Use case

RAG application threat model

Model retrieval components, data flows, identities, authorization boundaries, provenance controls, and candidate abuse scenarios.

Use case

SaaS architecture review

Model tenant boundaries, external providers, identity transitions, data movement, agent actions, and control ownership.

Use case

Secure design review before release

Turn design-level security decisions into assigned remediation work and a durable review record.

Use case

Compliance and assurance evidence

Produce reviewed design evidence that can support SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, customer review, and internal assurance without claiming that the canvas itself certifies compliance.

Early access

Bring the threat model into engineering and review workflows.

What early access includes

Threat models that produce assigned work and durable evidence.

Join the early access list to be first to run a structured AI threat model for your system — with Jira-ready remediation work and a Confluence security design record.

Platform delivery

Web application

Hosted canvas available now for standalone use — no Atlassian account required.

Open canvas demo

Confluence macro

Planned Confluence packaging would place risks and evidence next to architecture docs. Current access is direct scoping, not a live marketplace listing.

View marketplace ecosystem

Jira integration

Create and track Jira issues directly from the canvas model. Risks become sprint-ready security work.

Scope an AI Security Review

AI SECURITY WORKBENCH

Ready to connect Threat Canvas to engineering work?

Start with one bounded application, workflow, tool set, or security decision. Use the relevant Workbench experience to produce connected context, reviewable findings, assigned controls, and explicit next steps.