Bot & Cache Health Scorecard — entity review

Demo — www.example.com

Assign. 5 rules triggered across 2 domains. 2 rules could not be scored. Score 62.

Comparison window
2026-05-02 00:00 → 2026-05-03 00:00 UTC
vs 2026-05-01 00:00 → 2026-05-02 00:00 UTC
Assign Low confidence: 2 of 7 rules missing inputs Score 62

Score landed in escalate-severity band with 5 rules triggered.

Executive summary

What this report says

Score 62 — 5 rules triggered in Cache busting.

Triggered: Query String Diversity High, Query String Diversity With High Miss Rate, Volume Delta High, and 2 more. 2 additional rules could not be scored due to missing inputs — treat the score as a floor on risk, not a complete picture.

Analyst note

The selected host is the top-ranked scorecard entity because cache-busting and movement rules crossed thresholds. Treat the finding as a prioritization cue: validate query-string behavior and cache policy before attributing cause or changing controls.

From AI assistant
What triggered

5 rules crossed threshold

Recommended next steps

Investigations to queue from this report

  1. Review mover attribution for the same scope and confirm comparable current/baseline windows.
    1 host · www.example.com
  2. Inspect query-string diversity, cache-key behavior, and cache miss concentration by host and path.
    1 host · www.example.com
  3. Regenerate aggregate rows with SIEM and origin-latency fields if security or origin-impact review is required.
    1 host · www.example.com
Coverage detail 2 rules unscored

Rules listed below were not scored because their inputs are absent from the source row. They are not scored as safe.

Origin impact

  • origin_p95_delta_high — missing: current_origin_p95_ms, baseline_origin_p95_ms

Security evidence

  • siem_blocked_present — missing: siem_blocked_requests
Method & caveats

What this report is and isn't

Rule-based scorecard for Demo · Akamai, built from mechanical features only, compared against previous window. It reports what was measured, not why. Missing feature inputs are reported as such — they are not scored as safe.

Schema, source table, and constraints
Schema
bot_entity_scorecard.v1
Comparison
Previous window
Producer limit
20 (returned 1, truncated: false)
Tenant / database
Demo · Akamai
Table
akamai.bi_summary_hour
Constraints
Rule-based scorecard; Mechanical features only; No causal claim; LLM may summarize structured evidence only
Confidence reasons
Baseline window has enough rows; Current window has enough rows; Some feature inputs missing; Dimensions fit retained schema; Summary table used
Orientation — what this report measures
What this measures

A health score for one request host on a 0–100 scale. The host starts at 100 and loses points when mechanical signals — cache-miss rate, query-string churn, error rate, bot-share movement — cross thresholds. The current window is compared with the prior equivalent window.

How to read the score

Higher is healthier (100 = clean); lower = more triggered rules. Bands: escalate 0–40, monitor 40–70, observe 70–100.

  • escalate · 0–40
  • monitor · 40–70
  • observe · 70–100
What this can't say

Not a root-cause diagnosis or a malicious-traffic call. Missing inputs are reported as missing — they are not scored as safe.