mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Chatbots to PhishBots? -- Preventing Phishing scams created using ChatGPT, Google Bard and Claude

arXiv 2310.19181 ↗First posted 29 Oct 2023cs.CR cs.CLcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The advanced capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have made them invaluable across various applications, from conversational agents and content creation to data analysis, research, and innovation. However, their effectiveness and accessibility also render them susceptible to abuse for generating malicious content, including phishing attacks. This study explores the potential of using four popular commercially available LLMs, i.e., ChatGPT (GPT 3.5 Turbo), GPT 4, Claude, and Bard, to generate functional phishing attacks using a series of malicious prompts. We discover that these LLMs can generate both phishing websites and emails that can convincingly imitate well-known brands and also deploy a range of evasive tactics that are used to elude detection mechanisms employed by anti-phishing systems. These attacks can be generated using unmodified or "vanilla" versions of these LLMs without requiring any prior adversarial exploits such as jailbreaking. We evaluate the performance of the LLMs towards generating these attacks and find that they can also be utilized to create malicious prompts that, in turn, can be fed back to the model to generate phishing scams - thus massively reducing the prompt-engineering effort required by attackers to scale these threats. As a countermeasure, we build a BERT-based automated detection tool that can be used for the early detection of malicious prompts to prevent LLMs from generating phishing content. Our model is transferable across all four commercial LLMs, attaining an average accuracy of 96% for phishing website prompts and 94% for phishing email prompts. We also disclose the vulnerabilities to the concerned LLMs, with Google acknowledging it as a severe issue. Our detection model is available for use at Hugging Face, as well as a ChatGPT Actions plugin.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 122 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Oct 2023.

Builds on

21 of 122 references.

References · 21

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  4. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
  5. 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,811
  6. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
  7. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  8. 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,391
  9. 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 605
  10. 2023"Do Anything Now": Characterizing and Evaluating In-The-Wild Jailbreak Prompts on Large Language Modelscited by 489
  11. 2023Multi-step Jailbreaking Privacy Attacks on ChatGPTcited by 333
  12. 2023Exploiting Programmatic Behavior of LLMs: Dual-Use Through Standard Security Attackscited by 278
9 more
  1. 2023From ChatGPT to ThreatGPT: Impact of Generative AI in Cybersecurity and Privacycited by 143
  2. 2023Can ChatGPT replace StackOverflow? A Study on Robustness and Reliability of Large Language Model Code Generationcited by 73
  3. 2023ChatGPT and Software Testing Education: Promises & Perilscited by 42
  4. 2023Beyond the Safeguards: Exploring the Security Risks of ChatGPTcited by 36
  5. 2022Targeted Phishing Campaigns using Large Scale Language Modelscited by 23
  6. 2019Detecting and Characterizing Lateral Phishing at Scalecited by 21
  7. 2023Predicting Code Coverage without Executioncited by 9
  8. 2014Evaluating topic coherence measurescited by 6
  9. 2023Evaluating ChatGPT's Performance for Multilingual and Emoji-based Hate Speech Detectioncited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 9; 2025: 4.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Generating Phishing Attacks using ChatGPT
  2. 2024Next-Generation Phishing: How LLM Agents Empower Cyber Attackers
  3. 2025Phishing Detection in the Gen-AI Era: Quantized LLMs vs Classical Models
  4. 2026Clouding the Mirror: Stealthy Prompt Injection Attacks Targeting LLM-based Phishing Detection
  5. 2024AbuseGPT: Abuse of Generative AI ChatBots to Create Smishing Campaigns
  6. 2026GuardPhish: Securing Open-Source LLMs from Phishing Abuse
  7. 2026An Empirical Evaluation of Prompt Injection Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models Across Multilingual and Obfuscated Attack Scenarios
  8. 2025Evaluating Large Language Models for Phishing Detection, Self-Consistency, Faithfulness, and Explainability