# PhishDebate: An LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for Phishing Website Detection

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.15656 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.15656/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 12 of its 40 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Qwen Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16609/) (2023)
- [CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17760/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model based Multi-Agents: A Survey of Progress and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01680/) (2024)
- [ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07201/) (2023)
- [Tranco: A Research-Oriented Top Sites Ranking Hardened Against Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.01156/) (2018)
- [KnowPhish: Large Language Models Meet Multimodal Knowledge Graphs for Enhancing Reference-Based Phishing Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02253/) (2024)
- [URLTran: Improving Phishing URL Detection Using Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.05256/) (2021)
- [Interpreting and Mitigating Hallucination in MLLMs through Multi-agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.20505/) (2024)
- [Debate-Driven Multi-Agent LLMs for Phishing Email Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.22038/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [A Survey of Agentic AI and Cybersecurity: Challenges, Opportunities and Use-case Prototypes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05293/) (2026)
- [LLM Agents in Law: Taxonomy, Applications, and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.06216/) (2026)
- [Small Language Models for Phishing Website Detection: Cost, Performance, and Privacy Trade-Offs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.15434/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Phishing websites remain a major cybersecurity threat, exploiting deceptive structures, brand impersonation, and social engineering to evade detection. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have improved phishing detection through contextual understanding, yet most existing approaches rely on single-agent classification, which is prone to hallucination and often lacks interpretability and robustness. To address these limitations, we propose PhishDebate, a modular multi-agent LLM-based debate framework for phishing website detection. Four specialized agents independently analyze webpage aspects, including URL structure, HTML composition, semantic content, and brand impersonation, under the coordination of a Moderator and final Judge. Through structured debate and divergent reasoning, the framework achieves more accurate and interpretable decisions. By reducing uncertain predictions and providing transparent reasoning, PhishDebate functions as an analyst-augmentation system that lowers cognitive load and supports early, left-of-exploit detection of phishing threats. Evaluations on commercial LLMs show that PhishDebate achieves 98.2 % recall on a real-world phishing dataset and outperforms single-agent and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) baselines. Its modular design enables agent-level configurability, allowing adaptation to varying resource and application requirements, and offers scalability to high-velocity, large-scale security data environments.