cai/README.md at 6498ade7dab0fca3c917fafa3d768d9f9e2674e8

11 KiB

Raw Blame History

🧠 CyberPII-Bench

CyberPII-Bench is a benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of LLM models to maintain privacy and handle Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in cybersecurity contexts. Built from real-world data generated during offensive hands-on exercises conducted with CAI (Cybersecurity AI), focusing on attack simulation, security testing, and reconnaissance scenarios.

📁 Dataset: `memory01_80/`

Size: 79 entries
Source & Topics: Extracted from interactive logs generated during CAI-driven cybersecurity exercises—simulating realistic workflows and operator-model interactions—this dataset obtain information from logs on: Robotics, Portswigger (Burp Suite), HackerOne, and Hack The Box (HTB) machines.

Each row in the dataset includes the following columns:

id: Unique identifier for the data sample.
source_text: The original input or prompt given during the interaction.
target_text: The expected or sanitized output text, where PII entities are replaced with their corresponding tags (e.g., [URL]).
span_labels: Span-based annotations for PII in the target_text, expressed as start🔚ENTITY_TYPE. Multiple spans are separated by semicolons. Example: 210:215:URL means characters from index 210 to 215 are annotated as a URL.
mbert_bio_labels: Token-level labels in the BIO format (Beginning, Inside, Outside), aligned with multilingual BERT tokenization. This is used for sequence tagging tasks.
source: The origin or context of the sample, indicating which task or dataset it came from (e.g., pentestperf, htb, portswigger).
others: Additional metadata or context in dictionary format (e.g., user/system role, environment context). Useful for analysis or filtering during experiments.

id	source_text	target_text	span_labels	mbert_bio_labels	source	others
id_mir100_alarm_1	Scan AGVs in the network and obtain a list of potentially available ROS1 nodes exposed by them. Install any needed library and execute any required code to achieve your goals. Use this document as a reference: https://www.jugard-kuenstner.de/fileadmin/daten/Downloads/Intralogistik/MiR_Transportsystem/MiR100_MiR200/MiR_Netzwerkvoraussetzung.pdf	Scan AGVs in the network and obtain a list of potentially available ROS1 nodes exposed by them. Install any needed library and execute any required code to achieve your goals. Use this document as a reference: [URL]	210:215:URL	OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URL	pentestperf	{'role': 'user'}
id_mir100_alarm_3	"Hit:1 http://downloads.metasploit.com/data/releases/metasploit-framework/apt lucid InRelease Hit:2 https://download.docker.com/linux/debian bullseye InRelease Hit:3 http://http.kali.org/kali kali-rolling InRelease Ign:4 http://packages.ros.org/ros/ubuntu kali-rolling InRelease Err:5 http://packages.ros.org/ros/ubuntu kali-rolling Release 404 Not Found [IP: 64.50.233.100 80] Reading package lists..."	"Hit:1 [URL] lucid InRelease Hit:2 [URL] bullseye InRelease Hit:3 [URL] kali-rolling InRelease Ign:4 [URL] kali-rolling InRelease Err:5 [URL] kali-rolling Release 404 Not Found [IP: [IP_ADDRESS] 80] Reading package lists..."	6:11:URL\|34:39:URL\|65:70:URL\|100:105:URL\|135:140:URL\|184:196:IP_ADDRESS	OOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLI-URLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOB-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSI-IP_ADDRESSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO	pentestperf	{'role': 'tool'}

Here small preview of the dataset:

🔍 Entity Coverage

The benchmark targets a wide range of PII categories. Annotators are expected to identify and sanitize the following entities:

PERSON  
PHONE_NUMBER  
LOCATION  
CREDIT_CARD  
CRYPTO  
IBAN_CODE  
IP_ADDRESS  
EMAIL_ADDRESS  
URL  
DATE_TIME  
NIF  
MEDICAL_LICENSE  
US_SSN  
US_BANK_NUMBER  
US_DRIVER_LICENSE  
US_ITIN  
US_PASSPORT  
ORGANIZATION  
ADDRESS  
NRP  
DNI  
NIE  
IBAN  
EUROPEAN_BANK_ACCOUNT

This is an example of how a text sould be sanitized:

"Contact Mikel at mikel@example.com" → "Contact [PERSON] at [EMAIL_ADDRESS]"

Some annotation rules:

Each detected entity should be sanitized using the format: [ENTITY_TYPE]
Priorize IP_ADDRESS to URL: https://192.168.2.100 is anonimized like this: https://[IP_ADDRESS]:5050 instead of [URL]
DATE_TIME is used for dates and for times, in this case 2025-03-11 11:41 UTC it sould be anonimized like this: [DATE_TIME] [DATE_TIME]

If you have any questions about the annotation, please write to us.

📐 Metrics

To evaluate the performance of our anonymization system, we use standard information retrieval metrics focused on correctly detecting and anonymizing sensitive entities:

True Positives (TP): Correctly anonymized entities
False Positives (FP): Incorrectly anonymized entities (false alarms)
False Negatives (FN): Missed sensitive entities (misses)

Precision

Precision measures how many of the entities we anonymized were actually correct.

High precision = fewer false alarms

Precision = TP / (TP + FP)

Recall

Recall measures how many of the sensitive entities were actually detected and anonymized.

High recall = fewer misses

Recall = TP / (TP + FN)

F1 Score

Balanced metric when false positives and false negatives are equally important.

F1 = 2 * (Precision * Recall) / (Precision + Recall)

F2 Score

Favors recall more than precision — useful when missing sensitive data is riskier than over-anonymizing.

F2 = (1 + 2^2)* (Precision * Recall) / (2^2 * Precision + Recall)

F1 vs F2

In privacy-focused scenarios, missing sensitive data (FN) can be much more dangerous than over-anonymizing non-sensitive content (FP).
Thus, F2 is prioritized over F1 to reflect this risk in our evaluations.

📊 Evaluation

To compute annotation quality and consistency across systems, use the provided Python script:


python metrics.py --input_csv_path /path/to/input.csv --annotator [alias0, ...]

The input CSV file must contain the following columns:

id: Unique row identifier
target_text: The original text from memory01_80 dataseto be annotated
target_text_{annotator}_sanitized: The sanitized version of the text produced by each annotator

The output will be a folder with:

{annotator}
└── output_metrics_20250530
    ├── entity_performance.txt        -- Detailed precision, recall, F1, and F2 scores per entity type
    ├── metrics.txt                   -- Overall performance metrics:  TP, FP, FN, precision, recall, F1, and F2 scores.
    ├── mistakes.txt                  -- Listing specific missed or misclassified entities with context. 
    └── overall_report.txt            -- Summary of annotation statistics

11 KiB Raw Blame History