Red teaming in the age of AI-augmented defenders: Evaluating human Vs. machine tactics in professional penetration testing

This paper examines the changing face of red teaming in the field of cybersecurity with an emphasis on the difference between human and machine-enhanced strategies in professional penetration testing. In conducting an unclassified study, the paper assesses the potential of AI tools in augmenting defender capabilities in areas where AI tools demonstrate potential advantages over human red teams in undertaking offensive missions. The effectiveness of the two methods is evaluated using a blend of case studies, experimental data and comparison analysis in the real life penetrating and testing of environments. The most important insights were that, although AI is crucial when it comes to speed, flexibility, and being able to detect patterns, human testers still win in terms of exploiting more complex vulnerabilities, especially in the cases where the problem has to be solved creatively. The paper also reflects the weaknesses of AI on simulating the abilities of human intuition and decision-making. The findings emphasize the possibility of a hybrid model, which in addition to precision work, supported by AI, utilizes the strategic sense of human testers, providing innovations in new future professional practices in penetration testing.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-07-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17262801
Primary Topic
Cognitive Science and Education Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Red teaming in the age of AI-augmented defenders: Evaluating human Vs. machine tactics in professional penetration testing

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Cognitive Science and Education Research
article

Red teaming in the age of AI-augmented defenders: Evaluating human Vs. machine tactics in professional penetration testing

article en

Abstract

This paper examines the changing face of red teaming in the field of cybersecurity with an emphasis on the difference between human and machine-enhanced strategies in professional penetration testing. In conducting an unclassified study, the paper assesses the potential of AI tools in augmenting defender capabilities in areas where AI tools demonstrate potential advantages over human red teams in undertaking offensive missions. The effectiveness of the two methods is evaluated using a blend of case studies, experimental data and comparison analysis in the real life penetrating and testing of environments. The most important insights were that, although AI is crucial when it comes to speed, flexibility, and being able to detect patterns, human testers still win in terms of exploiting more complex vulnerabilities, especially in the cases where the problem has to be solved creatively. The paper also reflects the weaknesses of AI on simulating the abilities of human intuition and decision-making. The findings emphasize the possibility of a hybrid model, which in addition to precision work, supported by AI, utilizes the strategic sense of human testers, providing innovations in new future professional practices in penetration testing.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Telekom Austria (AT)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Cognitive Science and Education Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.