# Attack Path Analysis Figures
Grounded path steps and explicit hypotheses.
Attack Path Analysis separates what the evidence directly supports from what remains an explicit hypothesis requiring validation or analyst review.
Attack Path Analysis separates what the evidence directly supports from what remains an explicit hypothesis requiring validation or analyst review.
- 1Code and configuration evidence
- 2Runtime and trace evidence
- 3Identity and permission evidence
- 4Scanner and adversarial findings
- Observed entry condition
- Supported intermediate action
- Evidence-supported impact
- Plausible next step
- Assumption requiring challenge
- Unverified impact extension
Inference never becomes grounded merely because it is plausible; evidence or explicit analyst validation must change its status.
- Evidence confirms extension
- Analyst review required
- Extension rejected
Interrupt the paths.
Related attack paths may converge on a small number of authority, approval, component, data, tool, or control weaknesses. Prioritize the changes that interrupt the most consequential supported paths, then retest the original conditions.
Related attack paths may converge on a small number of authority, approval, component, data, tool, or control weaknesses. Prioritize the changes that interrupt the most consequential supported paths, then retest the original conditions.
From connected evidence to qualified paths.
Attack Path Analysis combines fragmented security observations with system, identity, authority, code, runtime, and control context to construct evidence-qualified paths and structured remediation outputs.
Attack Path Analysis combines fragmented security observations with system, identity, authority, code, runtime, and control context to construct evidence-qualified paths and structured remediation outputs.