IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,730,903
Granted Patent B1
US 12,730,903 · App. 19/406,138 · Granted Sep 8, 2026

End-to-end ai asset remediation

Inventors: Gil Elbaz (Tel Aviv, IL); Maxim Kogan (Tel Aviv, IL)
Assignee: Onyx Security Ltd.
G06F21/577
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,730,903
App. No.
19/406,138
Granted
Sep 8, 2026
Kind
B1
Abstract

A system and method for end-to-end AI asset remediation are presented. The method includes analyzing a plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine an optimal remediation path; constructing a remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path, whereby the constructed remediation plan comprises a plurality of generated corrective actions; performing one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions to verify one or more underlying root causes and to assess potential operational and security impacts; executing the plurality of generated corrective actions across internal and external systems; and performing post-action reevaluation to validate success of the executed plurality of generated corrective actions.

Claims (50)

1 . A method for end-to-end artificial intelligence (AI) asset remediation, comprising:

analyzing a plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine an optimal remediation path;

constructing a remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path, whereby the constructed remediation plan comprises a plurality of generated corrective actions;

prior to executing the plurality of generated corrective actions, performing one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions within a controlled environment that mirrors a production environment to verify one or more underlying root causes and to assess potential operational, security, and stability impacts of the plurality of generated corrective actions;

executing the plurality of generated corrective actions across internal and external systems; and

performing post-action reevaluation to validate that execution of the plurality of generated corrective actions neutralized and resolved at least one of the plurality of identified security risks, the plurality of identified compliance risks, and the plurality of identified security posture gaps.

2 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

reconstructing the constructed remediation plan based on results of the performed one or more simulations, wherein the simulation results indicate at least one of: a different or deeper root cause, an unintended operational or security impact, a requirement that one or more corrective actions include additional steps or revised sequencing, a determination that one or more corrective actions are unnecessary, or a need to reevaluate compliance or governance requirements.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein analyzing the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine the optimal remediation path comprises using, at least in part, a remediation intelligence engine to maximize risk reduction across an enterprise environment.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein performing the post-action reevaluation to validate the success of the executed plurality of generated corrective actions comprises using, at least in part, a reasoning model to implement a closed-loop verification process.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein executing the plurality of generated corrective actions across the internal and external systems comprises using, at least in part, a reasoning model to autonomously deploy the plurality of generated corrective actions.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein constructing the remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path comprises using, at least in part, a reasoning model to perform advanced reasoning to analyze the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps, established platform integrations, organizational policies, and a textual recipe book.

7 . The method of claim 1 , wherein performing the one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions comprises using, at least in part, a reasoning model to apply the plurality of generated corrective actions within a controlled environment.

8 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the success of the executed plurality of generated corrective actions is determined based on resolving the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps across a plurality of discovered AI assets in an enterprise environment.

9 . The method of claim 1 , wherein performing the post-action reevaluation further comprises:

reperforming a posture management process; and

reperforming a runtime protection process.

10 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

implementing a closed-loop verification process that uses results of the performed post-action reevaluation to update remediation logic for future remediation efforts.

11 . The method of claim 8 , wherein a discovered AI asset comprises any one of: a tool, a data source, or an other AI asset.

12 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps are identified through a performed posture management process and a performed runtime protection process.

13 . A system for end-to-end artificial intelligence (AI) asset remediation comprising:

one or more processors configured to:

analyze a plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine an optimal remediation path;

construct a remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path, whereby the constructed remediation plan comprises a plurality of generated corrective actions;

prior to executing the plurality of generated corrective actions, perform one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions within a controlled environment that mirrors a production environment to verify one or more underlying root causes and to assess potential operational, security, and stability impacts of the plurality of generated corrective actions;

execute the plurality of generated corrective actions across internal and external systems; and

perform post-action reevaluation to validate that execution of the plurality of generated corrective actions neutralized and resolved at least one of the plurality of identified security risks, the plurality of identified compliance risks, and the plurality of identified security posture gaps.

14 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:

reconstruct the constructed remediation plan based on results of the performed one or more simulations, wherein the simulation results indicate at least one of: a different or deeper root cause, an unintended operational or security impact, a requirement that one or more corrective actions include additional steps or revised sequencing, a determination that one or more corrective actions are unnecessary, or a need to reevaluate compliance or governance requirements.

15 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when analyzing the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine the optimal remediation path, are configured to use, at least in part, a remediation intelligence engine to maximize risk reduction across an enterprise environment.

16 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when performing the post-action reevaluation to validate the success of the executed plurality of generated corrective actions, are configured to use, at least in part, a reasoning model to implement a closed-loop verification process.

17 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when executing the plurality of generated corrective actions across the internal and external systems, are configured to use, at least in part, a reasoning model to autonomously deploy the plurality of generated corrective actions.

18 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when constructing the remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path, are configured to use, at least in part, a reasoning model to perform advanced reasoning to analyze the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps, established platform integrations, organizational policies, and a textual recipe book.

19 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when performing the one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions, are configured to use, at least in part, a reasoning model to apply the plurality of generated corrective actions within a controlled environment.

20 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the success of the executed plurality of generated corrective actions is determined based on resolving the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps across a plurality of discovered AI assets in an enterprise environment.

21 . The system of claim 20 , wherein a discovered AI asset comprises any one of: a tool, a data source, or an other AI asset.

22 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors, when performing the post-action reevaluation, are configured to:

reperform a posture management process; and

reperform a runtime protection process.

23 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:

implement a closed-loop verification process that uses results of the performed post-action reevaluation to update remediation logic for future remediation efforts.

24 . The system of claim 13 , wherein the plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps are identified through a performed posture management process and a performed runtime protection process.

25 . A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for end-to-end artificial intelligence (AI) asset remediation, the set of instructions comprising:

one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a device, cause the device to:

analyze a plurality of identified security risks, compliance risks, and security posture gaps to determine an optimal remediation path;

construct a remediation plan based on the optimal remediation path, whereby the constructed remediation plan comprises a plurality of generated corrective actions;

prior to executing the plurality of generated corrective actions, perform one or more simulations of the plurality of generated corrective actions within a controlled environment that mirrors a production environment to verify one or more underlying root causes and to assess potential operational security, and stability impacts of the plurality of generated corrective actions;

execute the plurality of generated corrective actions across internal and external systems; and

perform post-action reevaluation to validate that execution of the plurality of generated corrective actions neutralized and resolved at least one of the plurality of identified security risks, the plurality of identified compliance risks, and the plurality of identified security posture gaps.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 15, 2025
From: ELBAZ, GIL; KOGAN, MAXIM
To: ONYX SECURITY LTD.
Reel/Frame 073215/0124 →
References Cited (98)
US 8176019B2 · Brodie et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8230387B2 · Srivastava et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 9311615B2 · Davenport et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 10860721B1 · Gentile · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11102052B2 · Sharma · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11212316B2 · Sweeney et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11283840B2 · Murray et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11503061B1 · Lin · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 11748458B2 · Sarkar · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11863578B1 · Speck et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12088599B1 · McCarson · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12326900B1 · Bianchi et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 12363156B1 · Thompson et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 12388806B2 · Davis et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 12418556B2 · Hamdi · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 12481665B1 · Gargano et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 12499329B2 · Shah et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20020059093A1 · Barton et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20030229525A1 · Callahan et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040093408A1 · Hirani et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20040260566A1 · King · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20060100958A1 · Cheng et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20070288253A1 · Cobb et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080015913A1 · Courtney et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080033775A1 · Dawson et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080082609A1 · O'Sullivan et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080221944A1 · Kelly et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090319312A1 · Moerdler et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100324952A1 · Bastos et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110055119A1 · Sengupta · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20140129457A1 · Peeler · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140137257A1 · Martinez et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20160012235A1 · Lee et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160366080A1 · Bastide et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170126712A1 · Crabtree et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170330197A1 · DiMaggio · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170357502A1 · Barday · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180191730A1 · Deters · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180268318A1 · Matam et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180285887A1 · Maung · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190207981A1 · Sweeney et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190355060A1 · Collins et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20210211472A1 · Murray et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210216928A1 · O'Toole et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210326411A1 · Sarkar · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210334386A1 · AlGhamdi et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210335367A1 · Graff et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210374767A1 · Kurian et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220050828A1 · Wu et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220188717A1 · Daley et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220366332A1 · Duessel · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220407883A1 · Rao · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20230061234A1 · Calado et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230113332A1 · Crabtree · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230208882A1 · Crabtree et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230269272A1 · Dambrot et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230283521A1 · Berger et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230308474A1 · Thompson · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230315764A1 · Kumar et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230328095A1 · Chesla · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240163304A1 · Gupta · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240223587A1 · Berger et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240314158A1 · Bourzikas · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240348664A1 · Mohanram et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240411867A1 · Sakazi et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240420161A1 · Shah et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20240422187A1 · Shah et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20250005488A1 · Meline, Jr. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250047701A1 · Siddam et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250063083A1 · Grinberg et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250156303A1 · Stevens · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250200290A1 · Birru et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250247414A1 · Baragaba · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250317464A1 · Mehrotra et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250335598A1 · Charles · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250358296A1 · Ray · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250377864A1 · Dangi et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250378178A1 · Pettingill · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250384374A1 · Ohashi et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250390352A1 · Crabtree et al. · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20260017386A1 · Ohayon et al. · 2026 [cited by applicant]
US 20260039674A1 · Siekman et al. · 2026 [cited by applicant]
US 20260081939A1 · Boyer · 2026 [cited by applicant]
Chandel et al., “Endpoint Protection: Measuring the Effectiveness of Remediation Technologies and Methodologies for Insider Threat,” 2019 International Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distributed Computing and Knowledge Dis… [cited by examiner]
Alkady et al., “Pentora: an Integrated Framework for Automated Web and Network Vulnerability Assessment,” 2025 International Mobile, Intelligent, and Ubiquitous Computing Conference (MIUCC) Year: 2025 | Conference Paper… [cited by examiner]
Disrupting the First Reported AI-Orchestrated Cyber Espionage Campaign: Full Report (Nov. 2025), https://www-cdn.anthropic.com/b2a76c6f6992465c09a6f2fce282f6c0cea8c200.pdf (accessed Nov. 25, 2025). [cited by applicant]
Artificial Intelligence Risk & Governance Wharton, University of Pennsylvania, Jan. 11, 2023 (Year: 2023). [cited by applicant]
Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, Jul. 2024 (Year: 2024). [cited by applicant]
Establishing a Governance Framework for AI-Powered Applications PaloAlto Networks, Cortex Cloud, White Paper, (Year: 2025. [cited by applicant]
Keller, Brandon, AI Security Posture Management (AI-SPM): What it is and How it Works Forcepoint, Apr. 18, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Kundu, Rohit, Comprehensive Guide to Large Language Model (LLM) Security Lakera, May 21, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
LLM Security for Enterprises: Risks and Best Practices Wiz Experts Team, Wiz, Oct. 12, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Milovanovic, Miroslav, Primer: AI Security Posture Management (AI-SPM) Knostic, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Poter, Alexis, AI SPM: AI Security Posture Management Big.ID Next, Sep. 23, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Saura, Pablo Fernandez et al., On Automating Security Policies with Contemporary LLMs (short paper) arXiv, Jun. 5, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Simplify Custom Posture Rule Creation with Upwind's LLM-based Rego Support Upwind.io, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
Streamline AI Governance with Informatic Informatica, eBook, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]
What is AI-SPM (AI Security Posture Management)? SentinelOne, Sep. 3, 2025 (Year: 2025). [cited by applicant]