Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The authors formalize target selection for LLM-driven penetration testing agents operating against deceptive network defenses as a budgeted decision process. This addresses a critical gap in automated cyber operations, where reasoning-capable agents must balance exploitation progress against the risk of squandering LLM query budgets on honeypots. Experiments in a controlled mixed-host testbed show that integrating a honeypot detector into the agent's dynamic skip-or-exploit policy significantly improves the efficiency of compromising legitimate targets under execution budget constraints.
Traditional cyber deception is breaking down: LLM-driven attack agents can now spot honeypots mid-reconnaissance and dynamically reroute their compute budgets toward real, high-value targets.
Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly employed for offensive cybersecurity tasks such as automated vulnerability discovery, reconnaissance, and penetration testing. This new capability also threatens one of the defender's most valuable tools: deception. Traditional honeypots rely on realism and obscurity to lure human or script-driven attackers into revealing tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), but LLM-driven attackers can reason about heterogeneous artifacts and use the honeypot suspicion to guide target-selection decisions. We present a systematic study of honeypot-aware budget allocation for LLM attack agents. We formalize the attacker's problem as a budgeted decision process: an agent interacts with potential targets, consuming LLM execution budget during reconnaissance and exploitation, and must decide whether to (continue exploitation) or (skip) when honeypot suspicion arises. Our findings show that with the proposed detector-guided policy, LLM agent attackers can effectively allocate budget to compromise hosts in a host pool, highlighting the importance of dynamically allocating budget in a controlled mixed-host testbed. While defenses are beyond our present scope, we discuss implications for future adversarially resilient and adaptive honeypot design.