Traditional threat intelligence usually sees only the last portion (about 5%) of an attack, with most arriving after the fact. A campaign launches, Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) surface, and security teams scramble to update their tools and handle alerts. By then, unfortunately, the window to take action has already closed.
The Silent Push Context Graph is built for the window that precedes the time to act. During a recent webinar, “Turning your SIEM Signals into Future Attack Prevention,” our solutions engineering team walked through exactly how it works inside real security stacks and shared what it reveals that traditional threat intelligence simply cannot.
Here are the five things that stood out:
1. Adversaries spend weeks building infrastructure before they attack — and that preparation is visible.
Before a phishing campaign hits an inbox or a command-and-control (C2) server receives its first callback, attackers are busy: registering domains, configuring servers, aging infrastructure. That process takes time. And because it follows consistent operational patterns, it leaves a trail.
The Context Graph tracks that trail. And rather than waiting passively for traffic to generate resolution records, Silent Push’s proprietary Passive-Aggressive DNS (PADNS) actively re-resolves every hostname it can find every single day. Layered with WHOIS data, host scan data, SSL certificates, honeypot interactions, and ASN information, those change signals make it possible to identify adversary infrastructure during the preparation phase, before an attack ever launches.
The Salt Typhoon example makes this concrete. When DarkTrace published its findings about Salt Typhoon infrastructure in October 2025, noting activity back to July, our team had already identified the same cluster in May, more than two months before the attack, and five months before public disclosure. This is what systematic infrastructure monitoring at scale can achieve. On average, we surface adversary staging infrastructure 104 days before it’s weaponized.
2. Indicators of Future Attack are not a replacement for IOCs. They’re the other side of the coin.
IOCs still matter. They’re essential for industry sharing, retro hunting, and understanding what happened during an incident. But they only describe the part of the timeline that’s already passed.
Our Indicators of Future Attack® (IOFA) describe what is being built right now, and where it is likely to be aimed next. Unlike a risk score based on domain age, IOFA are grounded in how infrastructure is actively being built and managed, identifying the same operational TTPs that adversaries use every time. Even when they rotate hosting providers or change subnets, the process stays consistent.
Used together, IOCs and IOFA give security teams a more complete picture of adversary activity. One looks back. One looks forward. You need both.
3. The Context Graph plugs directly into the tools your team already uses.
Intelligence is most useful when it can drive action. The Context Graph is designed to integrate into SIEMs, SOAR platforms, and data pipeline tools, not as a side project, but as a live feed that changes how those tools respond.
In practice, IOFA feeds flow automatically into endpoint detection lists (EDLs) for blocking. Correlation rules in your SIEM get enriched with verified infrastructure context. SOAR playbooks can trigger automated responses when an alert matches a tracked cluster. Our Threat Check API provides high-throughput true/false verdicts on any indicator, short-circuiting enrichment queues and accelerating triage without adding manual steps.
When an alert fires and already matches a known infrastructure cluster, analysts skip the enrichment queue entirely. Faster escalation, faster containment, and fewer decisions made under pressure.
4. Your own telemetry is the best seed for building intelligence.
Vendor threat feeds are built around their priorities, not yours. The infrastructure specifically targeting your organization may never appear in a shared feed.
The Context Graph addresses this by turning your internal alert data into the starting point for your own intelligence loop. Take an IP or domain that fired an alert. Query Silent Push for every related component: DNS history, WHOIS records, scan data, and infrastructure patterns. Surface everything connected to that original indicator. Push results back into your SIEM for retrospective hunting, and into your SOAR for continuous monitoring of anything new that spins up in that same cluster.
We call this the security infinity loop: detect, contextualize, hunt, respond, prevent, learn, and repeat. It’s not a one-time exercise. It’s a continuously hardening posture that gets better with every cycle. And it starts working with less data than most teams expect. In one example from the webinar, 10,000 external IP addresses and domains were enough to seed the loop and begin surfacing related infrastructure.
5. Deterministic data makes AI-assisted security actually work.
AI-assisted workflows are only as reliable as the signals feeding them. Probability scores and unverified threat feeds produce noisy automation with false positives that burn analyst hours, automated responses triggered by the wrong signals, and AI agents that draw flawed conclusions from data without clear provenance.
Our data is deterministic. An IP either resolves to a domain or it does not. A certificate configuration either matches a known adversary pattern or it does not. That kind of hard data: DNS relationships, certificate configurations, WHOIS registration patterns, and behavioral content fingerprints, gives AI agents something to actually reason from.
The difference in practice: asking a model to evaluate a flat list of IOCs produces uncertain output. Pointing an agentic workflow at the Context Graph and asking it to find everything related to a confirmed indicator produces reliable cluster enumeration, infrastructure pivoting, and investigation reports at speed. The pivot is not incremental. It is the difference between automation that generates noise and automation that generates action your team can trust.
The Bottom Line: It’s Not Theoretical; It’s Measurable
The Context Graph is not designed to replace the security stack you already have. Instead, it fills the gap that a legacy stack was never designed to cover: the preparation phase, the window between when adversaries start building their infrastructure and when they strike.
What the webinar discussion underscores is that this gap is not theoretical; it’s measurable. In the weeks of lead time, we surface before attacks launch, in the clusters that never make it into a shared feed, and in the alert queues that shrink when IOFA start flowing from the Context Graph into the tools doing the blocking.
Getting Started
With Silent Push, you can neutralize before compromise. Book a demo with our experts to see the Context Graph in action, or start exploring the data on our platform by signing up for our free Community Edition.
Enjoy the Full Webinar
If you’d like to check out the webinar, “Turn Your SIEM Signals Into Future Attack Prevention,” with our solutions engineering team, you can register to watch it on demand at your convenience.
FAQs
What is an IOFA, and how is it different from an IOC?
An IOC documents infrastructure that has already been used in an attack. This is valuable for retrospective hunting and industry sharing. IOFA identify infrastructure that is actively being staged but not yet weaponized, giving security teams the opportunity to block it before a campaign launches. The two are complementary: IOCs tell you what happened, IOFA tell you what’s coming.
How does the Context Graph identify adversary infrastructure before it is used?
The Context Graph continuously analyzes how infrastructure is built and managed across DNS, WHOIS, certificates, host scans, honeypot data, and ASN information. When management patterns match known adversary TTPs, such as consistent registration windows, shared server configurations, and recurring hosting behaviors, those clusters are flagged as IOFA. The signal is the operational process, not simply presence on a known bad list.
How much internal telemetry does a team need to get started?
Less than most teams expect. As demonstrated in the webinar, a set of 10,000 external IPs and domains observed crossing an enterprise network was enough to seed the intelligence loop, surface related infrastructure, and begin continuous monitoring. More data improves results, but the process is designed to deliver value from whatever telemetry you have available.
