Cited by 13Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSpam and Phishing DetectionInformation and Cyber Security

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Act as a Honeytoken Generator! An Investigation into Honeytoken Generation with Large Language Models

Open access
Reti, Daniel, Becker, Norman, Angeli, Tillmann, Chattopadhyay, Anasuya, Schneider, Daniel, Vollmer, Sebastian, Schotten, Hans D.·2024·Proceedings of the 11th ACM Workshop on Adaptive and Autonomous Cyber Defense

Abstract

With the increasing prevalence of security incidents, the adoption of deception-based defense strategies has become pivotal in cybersecurity. This work addresses the challenge of scalability in designing honeytokens, a key component of such defense mechanism. The manual creation of honeytokens is a tedious task. Although automated generators exists, they often lack versatility, being specialized for specific types of honeytokens, and heavily rely on suitable training datasets.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3689935.3690394

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. 10.1109/DSN-S54099.2022.00011 · DOI
  2. Mohammed H Almeshekah. 2015. Using Deception to Enhance Security: A Taxonomy, Model, and Novel Uses. Doctor of Philosophy. Purdue University.
  3. 10.1145/2683467.2683482 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.ins.2016.04.019 · DOI
  5. Hristo Bojinov, Elie Bursztein, Xavier Boyen, and Dan Boneh. 2010. Kamouflage: Loss-Resistant Password Management. In Computer Security -- ESORICS 2010, Dimitris Gritzalis, Bart Preneel, and Marianthi Theoharidou (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 286--302.
  6. 10.48550/arXiv.2303.13521 · DOI
  7. Aakanksha Chowdhery Sharan Narang Jacob Devlin Maarten Bosma Gaurav Mishra Adam Roberts Paul Barham Hyung Won Chung Charles Sutton Sebastian Gehrmann Parker Schuh Kensen Shi Sashank Tsvyashchenko Joshua Maynez Abhishek Rao Parker Barnes Yi Tay Noam Shazeer Vinodkumar Prabhakaran Emily Reif Nan Du Ben Hutchinson Reiner Pope James Bradbury Jacob Austin Michael Isard Guy Gur-Ari Pengcheng Yin Toju Duke Anselm Levskaya Sanjay Ghemawat Sunipa Dev Henryk Michalewski Xavier Garcia Vedant Misra Kevin Robinson Liam Fedus Denny Zhou Daphne Ippolito David Luan Hyeontaek Lim Barret Zoph Alexander Spiridonov Ryan Sepassi David Dohan Shivani Agrawal Mark Omernick Andrew M. Dai Thanumalayan Sankaranarayana Pillai Marie Pellat Aitor Lewkowycz Erica Moreira Rewon Child Oleksandr Polozov Katherine Lee Zongwei Zhou Xuezhi Wang Brennan Saeta Mark Diaz Orhan Firat Michele Catasta Jason Wei Kathy Meier-Hellstern Douglas Eck Jeff Dean Slav Petrov and Noah Fiedel. 2022. PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.02311 · arXiv
  8. Fred Cohen. 2006. The Use of Deception Techniques : Honeypots and Decoys. In Handbook of Information Security, H. Bidgoli (Ed.). Vol. 3. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 636--655.
  9. Lizhou Fan, Lingyao Li, Zihui Ma, Sanggyu Lee, Huizi Yu, and Libby Hemphill. 2023. A Bibliometric Review of Large Language Models Research from 2017 to 2023. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.02020 · arXiv
  10. 10.48550/arXiv.1804.06196 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3300381 · DOI
  12. 10.1145/3214305 · DOI
  13. Frederick Jelinek. 2022. Statistical Methods for Speech Recognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
  14. Ari Juels and Ronald L. Rivest. 2013. Honeywords: making password-cracking detectable. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM SIGSAC conference on Computer & communications security (CCS '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 145--160. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/90627
  15. 10.1145/2508859.2516671 · DOI
  16. Kevin Dennean, Sundeep Gantori, Delwin Kurnia Limas, Allen Pu, Reid Gilligan. 2023. Let's chat about ChatGPT. https://www.ubs.com/global/en/wealth-management/our-approach/marketnews/article/_jcr_content.0116126696.file/PS9jb250ZW50L2RhbS9pbXBvcnRlZC9jaW9yZXNlYXJjaC9wZGYvMTUvODUvNzEvNy8xNTg1NzE3L2VuL290aGVycy8xNTg1NzE3LnBkZg==/1585717.pdf
  17. Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2022. Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.11916 · arXiv
  18. M. Koster G. Illyes H. Zeller and L. Sassman. 2022. Robots Exclusion Protocol. RFC 9309. RFC Editor. https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9309 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9309. · DOI
  19. Taku Kudo. 2018. Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidates. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.10959 · arXiv
  20. Ondrej Lukás and Sebastian García. 2021. Deep Generative Models to Extend Active Directory Graphs with Honeypot Users. CoRR, Vol. abs/2109.06180 (2021), 8 pages.showeprint[arXiv]2109.06180 https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.06180 · arXiv
  21. 10.1109/ISI.2011.5984063 · DOI
  22. Forrest McKee and David Noever. 2023. Chatbots in a Honeypot World. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.03771 · arXiv
  23. OpenAI. 2023. GPT-4 Technical Report. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.08774 · arXiv
  24. Shuofei Qiao Yixin Ou Ningyu Zhang Xiang Chen Yunzhi Yao Shumin Deng Chuanqi Tan Fei Huang and Huajun Chen. 2022. Reasoning with Language Model Prompting: A Survey. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.09597 · arXiv
  25. 10.1109/CyberSecurity49315.2020.9138850 · DOI
  26. 10.18653/v1/P16-1162 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1145/2854152 · DOI
  28. 10.1109/CSAC.2003.1254322 · DOI
  29. Lance Spitzner. 2003 b. Honeypots: tracking hackers. Addison-Wesley, Boston.
  30. Ross Taylor, Marcin Kardas, Guillem Cucurull, Thomas Scialom, Anthony Hartshorn, Elvis Saravia, Andrew Poulton, Viktor Kerkez, and Robert Stojnic. 2022. Galactica: A Large Language Model for Science. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.09085 · arXiv
  31. Hugo Touvron Louis Martin Kevin Stone Peter Albert Amjad Almahairi Yasmine Babaei Nikolay Bashlykov Soumya Batra Prajjwal Bhargava Shruti Bhosale Dan Bikel Lukas Blecher Cristian Canton Ferrer Moya Chen Guillem Cucurull David Esiobu Jude Fernandes Jeremy Fu Wenyin Fu Brian Fuller Cynthia Gao Vedanuj Goswami Naman Goyal Anthony Hartshorn Saghar Hosseini Rui Hou Hakan Inan Marcin Kardas Viktor Kerkez Madian Khabsa Isabel Kloumann Artem Korenev Punit Singh Koura Marie-Anne Lachaux Thibaut Lavril Jenya Lee Diana Liskovich Yinghai Lu Yuning Mao Xavier Martinet Todor Mihaylov Pushkar Mishra Igor Molybog Yixin Nie Andrew Poulton Jeremy Reizenstein Rashi Rungta Kalyan Saladi Alan Schelten Ruan Silva Eric Michael Smith Ranjan Subramanian Xiaoqing Ellen Tan Binh Tang Ross Taylor Adina Williams Jian Xiang Kuan Puxin Xu Zheng Yan Iliyan Zarov Yuchen Zhang Angela Fan Melanie Kambadur Sharan Narang Aurelien Rodriguez Robert Stojnic Sergey Edunov and Thomas Scialom. 2023. Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models. arxiv: 2307.09288 [cs.CL] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.09288 · arXiv
  32. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is All you Need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, I. Guyon, U. Von Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (Eds.), Vol. 30. Curran Associates, Inc., Long Beach Convention Center, 11 pages. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/3f5ee243547dee91fbd053c1c4a845aa-Paper.pdf
  33. 10.1007/s11416-010-0150-4 · DOI
  34. 10.14722/ndss.2018.23142 · DOI
  35. Zecong Wang Jiaxi Cheng Chen Cui and Chenhao Yu. 2023. Implementing BERT and fine-tuned RobertA to detect AI generated news by ChatGPT. arxiv: 2306.07401 [cs.CL] · arXiv
  36. Jason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu, Adams Wei Yu, Brian Lester, Du Nan, Andrew M. Dai, and Quoc Le V. 2021. Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.01652 · arXiv
  37. Wayne Xin Zhao Kun Zhou Junyi Li Tianyi Tang Xiaolei Wang Yupeng Hou Yingqian Min Beichen Zhang Junjie Zhang Zican Dong Du Yifan Chen Yang Yushuo Chen Zhipeng Chen Jinhao Jiang Ruiyang Ren Yifan Li Xinyu Tang Zikang Liu Peiyu Liu Jian-Yun Nie and Ji-Rong Wen. 2023. A Survey of Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.18223 · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • When LLMs meet cybersecurity: a systematic literature review

    Zhang, J., Bu, H., Wen, H., Liu, Y., Fei, H., Xi, R., Li, L., Yang, Y., Zhu, H., & Meng, D. (2025) · Cybersecurity · doi:10.1186/s42400-025-00361-w · Cited by 383

    “In their experiment, most people can’t recognize whether the remote host is a real one or a honeypot generated by LLMs. Reti et al. (2024) systematically investigates the use of LLMs to create a variety of honeytokens.”

Metadata

Authors
Reti, D., Becker, N., Angeli, T., Chattopadhyay, A., Schneider, D., Vollmer, S., & Schotten, H. D.
Affiliations
German Research Centre for Artificial Intelligence (DE)
Venue
Proceedings of the 11th ACM Workshop on Adaptive and Autonomous Cyber Defense
Publisher
ACM
Published
2024-11-11
Pages
1-12
OpenAlex
W4404991844
Cited by
13
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1
FWCI
3.75
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) (16KISK003K)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
Keywords
honeytokens, large language models, deception-based defense, cybersecurity, scalability, limited training data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review