Elastic Security Labs describes a benchmarking framework for evaluating LLMs in agentic Security Operations Center (SOC) workflows. Unlike generic leaderboards that score text quality, this framework seeds a realistic synthetic intrusion (the Chrysalis backdoor campaign) into a live Elastic deployment, runs every model through the same agent with identical tools and prompts, and captures full execution traces — every tool call, parameter, and result. Three evaluation suites are covered: an agent suite testing seven capability categories (alert triage, entity analytics, threat hunting, detection rule authoring, workflow authoring, workflow triggering, and multi-step response); Attack Discovery, which grades how well models correlate raw alerts into coherent attack narratives; and Automatic Migration, which measures how faithfully models port Splunk detection rules into Elastic. Scoring is blind (models anonymized before judging), caps unsubstantiated answers at 6/10, and separates reliability failures from quality scores. The key finding: model rankings flip depending on the capability, making per-task evaluation essential for production SOC deployments.

20m read timeFrom elastic.co
Post cover image
Table of contents
Why generic LLM benchmarks fail for agents for securityWhat we actually need to measureThe framework, end to endSeeding a realistic rangeThe agent under testThe prompt matrixWhat a single LLM evaluation run looks likeCapturing tool traces, tokens and latency in agent workflowsBlind LLM evaluation: how we remove model bias from scoringWhat this surfaces that leaderboards missEvaluating Attack Discovery: how LLMs correlate alerts into attack narrativesEvaluating Automatic Migration: Using LLMs to Port Detections from Other SIEMs to ElasticKey takeawaysConclusion: Why evidence-based LLM evaluation matters for security use-cases
118 Impressions