I recently finished building a deterministic AI-based firewall called Jave Ethical Defender. It’s designed to analyze incoming traffic at Layer 7 using entropy, trust scoring, and packet intent—not traditional rulesets. During real-world testing, it successfully neutralized a 5,000+ node botnet with 100/100-rated IPs from AbuseIPDB using under 10% CPU on a 7950X3D. Fail2Ban was enabled at the time but caught none of the attackers—Jave caught them all.
This isn’t just theory. I’ve published documentation, architecture, screenshots, and the actual performance report here:
https://github.com/JAVE-Ethical-Software/Jave-Defender-Publi... (Core engine is gated for responsible access requests to avoid misuse.)
It’s built to be lightweight, non-subscription, and eventually open to self-hosters and SMBs who want real AI-first perimeter defense.
I recently finished building a deterministic AI-based firewall called Jave Ethical Defender. It’s designed to analyze incoming traffic at Layer 7 using entropy, trust scoring, and packet intent—not traditional rulesets. During real-world testing, it successfully neutralized a 5,000+ node botnet with 100/100-rated IPs from AbuseIPDB using under 10% CPU on a 7950X3D. Fail2Ban was enabled at the time but caught none of the attackers—Jave caught them all.
This isn’t just theory. I’ve published documentation, architecture, screenshots, and the actual performance report here: https://github.com/JAVE-Ethical-Software/Jave-Defender-Publi... (Core engine is gated for responsible access requests to avoid misuse.)
It’s built to be lightweight, non-subscription, and eventually open to self-hosters and SMBs who want real AI-first perimeter defense.
Would love your thoughts on:
Risk scoring logic at the packet/header level
Ethical honeypots + deterministic behavior isolation
The approach of avoiding set rules entirely
Happy to answer anything. AMA.