Existing approaches to anomalous behaviour log detection, such as Wazuh rely primarily on predefined detection rules, while statistical anomaly detection approaches such as OpenSearch identify deviations from previously observed behavioural patterns. Recent research has investigated LLMs for log anomaly detection because of their ability to interpret semantic and contextual information. However, LLM-based approaches can be affected by prompt construction, noisy log data, and reliance on generic datasets that may lack endpoint-specific authentication behaviours. To address these limitations, this study develops a standardised instruction-based LLM classification framework for detecting anomalous authentication behaviours, including borderline cases. A controlled cybersecurity testbed was developed to generate endpoint-specific authentication data, producing a curated dataset comprising normal, borderline, and anomalous behavioural scenarios. Three instruction-tuned LLMs, Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct, and GPT-OSS 20B, were evaluated against Wazuh rule-based detection and OpenSearch Anomaly Detection using a common ground-truth severity framework. Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct achieved the strongest overall end-to-end detection performance, with an accuracy of 89.3%, recall of 88.2%, F1-score of 91.8%, and false negative rate of 11.8%. In comparison, Wazuh achieved an accuracy of 52.0% and false negative rate of 68.6%, while OpenSearch achieved an accuracy of 49.3% and false negative rate of 74.5%. Meta Llama also detected 80% of the borderline anomalous scenarios, compared with 20% for Wazuh and 15% for OpenSearch. Qwen achieved lower overall detection performance than Meta Llama but recorded the lowest average inference latency and 100% structured-response validity. GPT-OSS demonstrated strong classification performance when valid responses were produced.
Abdullah Alghamdi, Siamak Layeghy, Marius Portmanncs.CR cs.LG cs.NI
We propose a two-stage large language model (LLM) framework for zero-shot detection of insider threats and advanced persistent threats (APTs) from heterogeneous security logs. The framework models user activity as chronological timelines and incorporates retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to provide personalised behavioural context from each user's historical activity. Rather than performing end-to-end classification directly from raw logs, it first generates structured, interpretable sets of threat-specific risk indicators, which are then classified jointly across temporal sequences to capture attack patterns spanning multiple windows.The framework is evaluated on two benchmark datasets, CERT r5.2 for insider threat detection and PicoDomain for APT detection, using four combinations of two open-weight LLMs under both retrieval and non-retrieval settings. All configurations outperform the previous state-of-the-art LLM-based framework (GABM), with the best configuration improving the F1-score by 11.40 percentage points on CERT r5.2 and 31.50 percentage points on PicoDomain. Results further show that retrieval mainly benefits weaker LLMs by generating more discriminative risk indicators, whereas stronger models achieve comparable performance without retrieved context. The most effective assignment of LLMs to the two stages depends on the dataset. These findings show that the quality of the generated risk indicators is the main driver of zero-shot cyber threat detection performance.
Aniket Anand, Yiwei Hou, Daniel Fields +4cs.CR cs.CL
This paper presents AuditBench, a new benchmark dataset for evaluating the capabilities of LLMs at investigating security-related system audit logs. We design and use this benchmark to explore the performance of LLMs on four log-investigation tasks that incident response teams commonly perform, ranging from triaging alerts generated by detectors to identifying persistence mechanisms on compromised systems. AuditBench consists of system audit logs collected from Linux and Windows machines, and spans over 50 different security investigation scenarios, including both malicious and benign activity. Using our benchmark, we evaluate and analyze the performance of five frontier LLMs at analyzing audit logs for attack investigations. Our analysis illuminates how LLM performance and error profiles vary according to different design choices, such as differences in model size, data representation, prompt construction, and specific investigation tasks. Additionally, we characterize the quality of the explanations produced by LLMs and the types of errors that models make across our benchmark. Collectively, our work provides a foundation for assessing the capabilities of LLMs for investigating security logs, novel insights for practitioners using LLMs in security operations, and important directions for future research.