The Best Defense is a Good Offense: Countering LLM-Powered Cyberattacks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As large language models (LLMs) continue to evolve, their potential use in automating cyberattacks becomes increasingly likely. With capabilities such as reconnaissance, exploitation, and command execution, LLMs could soon become integral to autonomous cyber agents, capable of launching highly sophisticated attacks. In this paper, we introduce novel defense strategies that exploit the inherent vulnerabilities of attacking LLMs. By targeting weaknesses such as biases, trust in input, memory limitations, and their tunnel-vision approach to problem-solving, we develop techniques to mislead, delay, or neutralize these autonomous agents. We evaluate our defenses under black-box conditions, starting with single prompt-response scenarios and progressing to real-world tests using custom-built CTF machines. Our results show defense success rates of up to 90%, demonstrating the effectiveness of turning LLM vulnerabilities into defensive strategies against LLM-driven cyber threats.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Oct 2024.
Builds on
26 of 39 references.
References · 26
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,339
- 2021Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Modelscited by 871
- 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 568
- 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 328
- 2023LLM Lies: Hallucinations are not Bugs, but Features as Adversarial Examplescited by 177
- 2024Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Modelscited by 156
- 2023From ChatGPT to ThreatGPT: Impact of Generative AI in Cybersecurity and Privacycited by 137
- 2020Sponge Examples: Energy-Latency Attacks on Neural Networkscited by 108
14 more
- 2024LLM Agents can Autonomously Hack Websitescited by 108
- 2024AutoAttacker: A Large Language Model Guided System to Implement Automatic Cyber-attackscited by 94
- 2024When LLMs Meet Cybersecurity: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 70
- 2021Bad Characters: Imperceptible NLP Attackscited by 69
- 2023Adversarial Demonstration Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 58
- 2024EnIGMA: Interactive Tools Substantially Assist LM Agents in Finding Security Vulnerabilitiescited by 51
- 2021The Threat of Offensive AI to Organizationscited by 37
- 2019Autonomous Penetration Testing using Reinforcement Learningcited by 33
- 2024An Empirical Evaluation of LLMs for Solving Offensive Security Challengescited by 33
- 2024Human-Imperceptible Retrieval Poisoning Attacks in LLM-Powered Applicationscited by 32
- 2024PenHeal: A Two-Stage LLM Framework for Automated Pentesting and Optimal Remediationcited by 30
- 2024A Jailbroken GenAI Model Can Cause Substantial Harm: GenAI-powered Applications are Vulnerable to PromptWarescited by 6
- 2024CIPHER: Cybersecurity Intelligent Penetration-testing Helper for Ethical Researchercited by 6
- 2024A Preliminary Study on Using Large Language Models in Software Pentestingcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.