Abracadabra Labs / resource directory

Intersections · 14 links

Where the three subjects actually meet

An entry appears here only if it does real work in more than one of the three literatures. Papers that cite another field in passing are not included, which is why this page is short.

What is missing is the point. Deception against machine attackers is now a real, if young, line of work. The link between quantum cognition and either security topic is almost entirely absent. I found one entry applying quantum-cognition machinery to a language model, and it mostly reports an obstacle. I found nothing modelling an autonomous attacker's belief state in quantum-probability terms, and nothing evaluating whether cognitive-bias-based deception transfers to model attackers on the strength of that theory. That may be a gap in the literature or a gap in my searching; About says which parts I am confident about.

The three pairings

Attackers + Deception 11

11 entries that belong to both literatures, not just to one that mentions the other.

  • 0x4D31/galah

    LLM-powered web honeypot: generates a plausible HTTP response to whatever arrives instead of emulating fixed applications. Go, Apache-2.0.

    living
  • Adversary Village at DEF CON

    DEF CON community track on adversary simulation, emulation tactics and purple teaming. The programme page links no recordings at all, so it is hard to follow remotely.

    living
  • beelzebub-labs/beelzebub

    Low-code deception runtime, Go, GPL-3.0. The interesting part is the MCP bait tooling: decoys aimed at AI agents rather than human intruders. A commercial product sits on top.

    livingvendor-authoredopen version
  • Hacking Back the AI-Hacker: Prompt Injection as a Defense Against LLM-driven Cyberattacks

    Plants adversarial text in responses an attacking agent will read, disrupting it or compromising the attacker's own machine, with over 95% reported effectiveness. The cleanest statement of deception aimed at machines rather than people.

    preprintseminalopen version
  • Honeyquest for LLMs: Rethinking Cyber Deception for AI Attackers

    Twenty-one models against 174 reconnaissance queries, finding LLMs take deceptive bait far more often than humans, show no attention-diversion effect, and act on traps 73.4% of the time despite naming them in their reasoning.

    preprint
  • HoneyTrap: Deceiving Large Language Model Attackers to Honeypot Traps with Resilient Multi-Agent Defense

    Four cooperating agents divert jailbreak attempts into decoy responses, reporting a 68.77% average reduction in attack success while leaving legitimate queries intact. Preprint; the threat model is model-level, not network-level.

    preprint
  • Intelligent interactive honeypots: A systematization of AI-driven cyber deception

    Systematizes forty studies on AI-driven interactive honeypots, mapping interaction level to attack stage and calling out unstandardised datasets and evaluation as the field's main weaknesses. Carries a 2027 issue date.

  • LLM Honeypot: Leveraging Large Language Models as Advanced Interactive Honeypot Systems

    Fine-tunes an open-weights model on captured attacker sessions to generate honeypot responses, then evaluates realism and deploys it live. Preprint; evaluation is thinner than shelLM's.

    preprint
  • LLM in the Shell: Generative Honeypots

    shelLM, an LLM-backed Linux shell honeypot reporting a 0.90 true negative rate against security experts asked to tell it from a real host. The paper that started the generative-honeypot line.

  • pasquini-dario/project_mantis

    The Mantis decoys as running code: tarpitted FTP, deliberately vulnerable web apps, weak telnet, injection payloads, reverse-shell listeners.

    living
  • SoK: Honeypots & LLMs, More Than the Sum of Their Parts?

    Systematizes both directions at once: LLMs used to build honeypots, and honeypots built for LLM attackers. Includes a taxonomy of honeypot detection vectors and a critique of how the area evaluates itself.

    preprint

Attackers + Quantum cognition 2

2 entries that belong to both literatures, not just to one that mentions the other.

Deception + Quantum cognition 1

1 entry that belong to both literatures, not just to one that mentions the other.

  • A formulation of computational trust based on quantum decision theory

    Splits trust into objective and subjective components and uses interference terms to model how evaluations shift between isolated and comparative judgment. One of very few quantum-cognition papers aimed at a security-adjacent problem.

    paywalled