Investigate security events through explicit human review.
An investigation draws on endpoint or agent events. The team needs evidence it can inspect and an explicit boundary between an explanation, an approval and an action.
Security product founders and accountable security leaders
Illustrative walkthrough · not a product screenshot or deployment
Explore the reasoning
Select authorized records for one bounded investigation. Preserve source context, tenant scope and collection gaps.
Source reviewed
The decision behind the system
What may a security assistant investigate, propose and change?
A Rust local-lab prototype connecting authorized event intake, case evidence, separate approval roles and a sandbox response workflow. Production protection remains unqualified.
Hyperion Cyber explores incident evidence and human-approved sandbox response. Achilles inspects source code; Aegis structures governance evidence. These are separate research systems, not an integrated production security suite.
Evidence with context
Import authorized event records and local Wazuh files into tenant-scoped investigations. Make collection gaps, source context and uncertainty visible.
Human-approved sandbox actions
Separate the proposal, approval and execution roles, binding approval to the action digest and case revision. Current containment changes sandbox database state only.
Recovery as part of the record
Inspect revisioned case and asset records and encrypted snapshot recovery. These source mechanisms do not establish production confidentiality or security coverage.
Read the complete illustrative walkthrough
Import
Select authorized records for one bounded investigation. Preserve source context, tenant scope and collection gaps.
Propose
Assemble the case and a proposed response. Optional model explanation does not grant authority or establish that the explanation is correct.
Review
A separate approver reviews the exact proposed action. In the current lab, execution can change sandbox database state only.
Inspect
Review the case revision, action result and recovery conditions. Production protection and live integrations require independent qualification.
One inspectable artefact
Rust-rendered local application, authorized event intake and checkpointed local Wazuh-file collection.
A current boundary
Current containment changes sandbox database state, not endpoint, firewall, cloud or host controls. No production deployment or customer protection result is established.
How to start
Review one investigation workflow, its authority boundary and the evidence needed for a permitted evaluation. Live endpoint protection and production containment require separate implementation and qualification.
These are source and research records. Illustrative examples do not establish deployment, integration, certification or customer outcomes.
Explore the technical record and evidence
Business ↔ technology bridge · Cybersecurity capability experiment
What may a security assistant investigate, propose and change?
Hyperion Cyber explores incident evidence and human-approved sandbox response. Achilles inspects source code; Aegis structures governance evidence. These are separate research systems, not an integrated production security suite.
This is a portfolio and source interpretation—not a customer, deployment, certification, or outcome claim.
01
Business pressure
An investigation draws on endpoint or agent events. The team needs evidence it can inspect and an explicit boundary between an explanation, an approval and an action.
02
Product decision
Select authorized records for one bounded investigation. Preserve source context, tenant scope and collection gaps. Review the case revision, action result and recovery conditions. Production protection and live integrations require independent qualification.
03
Technical record
Import authorized event records and local Wazuh files into tenant-scoped investigations. Make collection gaps, source context and uncertainty visible. Separate the proposal, approval and execution roles, binding approval to the action digest and case revision. Current containment changes sandbox database state only. Inspect revisioned case and asset records and encrypted snapshot recovery. These source mechanisms do not establish production confidentiality or security coverage.
04
Evidence return
Review the case revision, action result and recovery conditions. Production protection and live integrations require independent qualification.
Source evidence
What the source actually establishes
A Rust local-lab implementation for security-event investigation, case evidence, separate analyst, approver and executor authority checked by the application, sandbox response and encrypted snapshot recovery. The research architecture extends beyond the implemented lab.
Maturity
Rust research prototype · local lab
Evidence review
Source snapshot through
Architecture and product decisions
Keep source evidence and optional model explanation separate from permission to act.
Require separate proposal, approval and execution authority for a specifically reviewed sandbox action.
Make case revisions, uncertain outcomes and recovery conditions visible before broader integration.
Inspectable evidence
Rust-rendered local application, authorized event intake and checkpointed local Wazuh-file collection.
Case and asset records, action-digest and case-revision-bound approval and sandbox database-state changes.
Age-encrypted snapshot and restore implementation with recovery restrictions. Repository validation records were inspected; this website review did not execute the venture suites.
Claim boundary
Current containment changes sandbox database state, not endpoint, firewall, cloud or host controls. No production deployment or customer protection result is established.
The source does not establish full SIEM, EDR or DLP coverage, detection performance, independent certification or model qualification.
The active database is not encrypted by the snapshot mechanism; filesystem protection, identity, keys, retention and operational controls require separate qualification. A same-database hash chain is not an independent audit anchor.
Repository evidence is not client, deployment, certification, or outcome evidence.
Work with Hyperion
Review one investigation workflow
A scoped review of the investigation workflow, authority boundary, implementation gaps and evaluation evidence, with named client and Hyperion responsibilities.
Bring a short description of your situation, constraints and decision. We agree the scope, responsibilities and quote before work begins.