AgentReadyHomeAgent Listing

← Deventral

Deventral — agentic threat model

9.2AIVSS 9.2 · Critical

Deventral presents a high-risk profile because it allows non-technical users to generate and execute custom code (micro tools) connected directly to internal data and systems. Without explicit sandboxing or code-review guardrails, this capability could be abused to execute arbitrary code or exfiltrate sensitive corporate data.

OWASP AIVSS score rationale

AIVSS = (CVSS_Base + AARS) × Mitigation_Factor, where AARS = (10 − CVSS_Base) × (Factor_Sum / 10) × ThM
CVSS base 8.5AARS uplift 0.75Factor sum 5.0/10Threat ×1.0Mitigation ×1.0
Autonomy of Action
0.60
Goal-Driven Planning
0.50
Self-Modification
0.30
Dynamic Tool Use
0.80
Persistent Memory
0.40
Contextual Awareness
0.60
Dynamic Identity
0.30
Multi-Agent Interactions
0.20
Non-Determinism
0.70
Opacity & Reflexivity
0.60

Scored with the canonical OWASP AIVSS formula (AIVSS calculator reference); agentic risk factors estimated from the agent’s described capabilities.

MAESTRO 7-layer threat model

Per-layer threats for this agent. Layers tagged “not certain from listing” are general, caveated commentary where the public description didn’t pin that layer.

L1 · Foundation Models⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The specific foundation models used to generate the micro tools are not disclosed. Threats include prompt injection or model reprogramming that could lead to the generation of malicious or backdoored tools.

L2 · Data Operations⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — While the platform connects to 'your data', the exact database types, vector stores, or RAG mechanisms are unspecified. Threats include unauthorized data access, data exfiltration, or knowledge-base poisoning via the generated tools.

L3 · Agent Frameworks✓ mapped

Deventral acts as an orchestration framework translating natural language instructions into executable micro tools. The primary threat is insecure tool generation, where the agent generates code containing vulnerabilities (e.g., SQL injection, SSRF) or executes malicious actions based on manipulated user instructions.

L4 · Deployment & Infrastructure⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The hosting and execution environment for the generated micro tools is not described. If the tools run without strict sandboxing or container isolation, a compromised tool could lead to container escape, privilege escalation, or lateral movement within the host network.

L5 · Evaluation & Observability⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — There is no mention of guardrails, logging, or evaluation frameworks to monitor the behavior of generated tools. This creates significant blind spots, making it difficult to detect anomalous tool behavior or malicious code execution.

L6 · Security & Compliance (cross-cutting)⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — No details are provided regarding identity management, access control (RBAC), or compliance standards. There is a risk that unauthorized business users could generate tools that bypass organizational security policies or access restricted data.

L7 · Agent Ecosystem⚠ not certain from listing

Not certain from the listing — The platform focuses on user-generated micro tools and does not explicitly mention multi-agent coordination or external marketplaces. However, if micro tools are allowed to interact or chain together, cascading failures or trust abuse could occur.

MAESTRO — the 7-layer agentic threat-modeling framework (Cloud Security Alliance / Ken Huang).