Authors: Even Eilertsen, Vasileios Mavroeidis, Gudmund Grov
Organizations: University of Oslo · Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI) · & University of Oslo
Abstract
Security analysts are overwhelmed by the volume of alerts and the low context provided by many detection systems. Early-stage investigations typically require manual correlation across multiple log sources, a task that is usually time-consuming. In this paper, we present an experimental, agentic workflow that leverages large language models (LLMs) augmented with predefined queries and constrained tool access (structured SQL over Suricata logs and grep-based text search) to automate the first stages of alert investigation. The proposed workflow integrates queries to provide an overview of the available data, and LLM components that selects which queries to use based on the overview results, extracts raw evidence from the query results, and delivers a final verdict of the alert. Our results demonstrate that the LLM-powered workflow can investigate log sources, plan an investigation, and produce a final verdict that has a significantly higher accuracy than a verdict produced by the same LLM without the proposed workflow. By recognizing the inherent limitations of directly applying LLMs to high-volume and unstructured data, we propose combining existing investigation practices of real-world analysts with a structured approach to leverage LLMs as virtual security analysts, thereby assisting and reducing the manual workload.
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.
Security Operations Centers (SOCs) face mounting operational challenges. These challenges come from increasing threat volumes, heterogeneous SIEM platforms, and time-consuming manual triage workflows. We present an end-to-end threat management framework that integrates ensemble-based detection, syntax-constrained query generation, and retrieval-augmented resolution support to automate critical security workflows. Our detection module evaluates both traditional machine learning classifiers and large language models (LLMs), then combines the three best-performing LLMs to create an ensemble model, achieving 82.8% accuracy while maintaining 0.120 false positive rate on SIEM logs. We introduce the SQM (Syntax Query Metadata) architecture for automated evidence collection. It uses platform-specific syntax constraints, metadata-based retrieval, and documentation-grounded prompting to generate executable queries for IBM QRadar and Google SecOps. SQM achieves a BLEU score of 0.384 and a ROUGE-L score of 0.731. These results are more than twice as good as the baseline LLM performance. For incident resolution and recommendation generation, we demonstrate that integrating SQM-derived evidence improves resolution code prediction accuracy from 78.3% to 90.0%, with an overall recommendation quality score of 8.70. In production SOC environments, our framework reduces average incident triage time from hours to under 10 minutes. This work demonstrates that domain-constrained LLM architectures with retrieval augmentation can meet the strict reliability and efficiency requirements of operational security environments at scale.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as analyst assistants in security operations centers (SOCs), where they ingest log and alert data to produce triage labels, incident summaries, or remediation advice. We study a structural failure mode of this design: many log fields are attacker controlled. User agents, URLs, payloads, DNS queries, and attempted usernames can therefore carry instructions to the model alongside evidence of the intrusion. We call this setting \emph{log-substrate prompt injection}. We introduce a four-class taxonomy of log-substrate attacks: direct override (S1), persona hijack (S2), context manipulation (S3), and obfuscated payloads (S4). We evaluate 48 strategy-defense-task combinations using \texttt{gpt-4o-mini} as the analyst. Three findings stand out. First, direct overrides are ineffective in our setting: all S1 classification attacks achieve 0% suppression. In contrast, persona hijacks suppress 68% of malicious logs under a naive classifier and remain effective under stronger defenses. Second, summarization is the highest-risk task: context manipulation reaches 96% injection success without defenses and 38% even with constrained output. Third, defenses reduce but do not eliminate the attack surface: average injection success falls from 26.6% under naive prompting to 11.8% under our strongest defense. We also compare empirical results to a deterministic mock analyst and find that simulation substantially mispredicts current model behavior, especially for direct overrides. These results suggest that SOC copilots should treat raw log content as adversarial input rather than ordinary analyst context.