235 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
235 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
base_model:
|
|||
|
|
- fdtn-ai/Foundation-Sec-8B
|
|||
|
|
language:
|
|||
|
|
- en
|
|||
|
|
library_name: transformers
|
|||
|
|
license: other
|
|||
|
|
pipeline_tag: text-generation
|
|||
|
|
tags:
|
|||
|
|
- security
|
|||
|
|
- llama
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct - Model Card
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Model Information
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Llama-3.1-FoundationAI-SecurityLLM-8B-Instruct (Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct) is an open-weight, 8-billion parameter instruction-tuned language model specialized for cybersecurity applications.
|
|||
|
|
It extends the Foundation-Sec-8B base model with instruction-following capabilities.
|
|||
|
|
It leverages prior training to understand security concepts, terminology, and practices across multiple security domains.
|
|||
|
|
Further instruction-tuning allows the model to interact with human users in a chat-like interface.
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct enables organizations to build AI-driven security tools that can be deployed locally, reducing dependency on cloud-based AI services while maintaining high performance on security-related tasks.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **Model Name:** Llama-3.1-FoundationAI-SecurityLLM-8B-Instruct (Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct)
|
|||
|
|
- **Model Developer:** Foundation AI at Cisco
|
|||
|
|
- **Model Card Contact:** https://fdtn.ai/contact
|
|||
|
|
- **Technical Report:** [Llama-3.1-FoundationAI-SecurityLLM-8B-Instruct Technical Report](https://huggingface.co/papers/2508.01059)
|
|||
|
|
- **Model Release Date:** August 1st, 2025
|
|||
|
|
- **Supported Language(s):** English
|
|||
|
|
- **Model Architecture:** Auto-regressive language model that uses an optimized transformer architecture (Meta Llama-3.1-8B backbone)
|
|||
|
|
- **Training Objective:** Instruction following and alignment with human preferences
|
|||
|
|
- **Training Data Status:** This is a static model trained on an offline dataset. Future versions of the tuned models will be released on updated data.
|
|||
|
|
- **License:** See NOTICE.md
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Intended Use
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Intended Use Cases
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct is designed for security practitioners, researchers, and developers building AI-powered security workflows and applications.
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct is optimized for three core use case categories:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **SOC Acceleration**: Automating triage, summarization, case note generation, and evidence collection.
|
|||
|
|
- **Proactive Threat Defense**: Simulating attacks, prioritizing vulnerabilities, mapping TTPs, and modeling attacker behavior.
|
|||
|
|
- **Engineering Enablement**: Providing security assistance, validating configurations, assessing compliance evidence, and improving security posture.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The model is intended for local deployment in environments prioritizing data security, regulatory compliance, and operational control.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Downstream Use
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct can be used directly for security-related chat use cases. Example downstream applications include:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- Summarization
|
|||
|
|
- Summarizing detection playbooks and incident reports
|
|||
|
|
- Consolidating fragmented analyst notes into structured case summaries
|
|||
|
|
- Classification
|
|||
|
|
- Mapping threats to MITRE ATT&CK techniques
|
|||
|
|
- Prioritizing vulnerabilities based on contextual risk
|
|||
|
|
- Classifying security-relevant emails and leaked file contents
|
|||
|
|
- Named Entity Recognition
|
|||
|
|
- Extracting compliance evidence from documents
|
|||
|
|
- Building network behavior profiles from technical manuals
|
|||
|
|
- Question & Answer
|
|||
|
|
- Assisting SOC analysts with alert triage and investigation
|
|||
|
|
- Responding to cloud security and software compliance queries
|
|||
|
|
- Reasoning and Text Generation
|
|||
|
|
- Generating red-team attack plans and threat models
|
|||
|
|
- Predicting attacker next steps in active investigations
|
|||
|
|
- Enriching vulnerability scan results with contextual insights
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
For questions or assistance with fine-tuning Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct, please reach out to the team.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Out-of-Scope Use
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The following uses are out-of-scope and are neither recommended nor intended use cases:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. **Generating harmful content** - The model should not be used to:
|
|||
|
|
- Generate malware or other malicious code
|
|||
|
|
- Create phishing content or social engineering scripts
|
|||
|
|
- Develop attack plans targeting specific organizations
|
|||
|
|
- Design exploitation techniques for vulnerabilities without legitimate security research purposes
|
|||
|
|
2. **Critical security decisions without human oversight** - The model should not be used for:
|
|||
|
|
- Autonomous security decision-making without human review
|
|||
|
|
- Critical infrastructure protection without expert supervision
|
|||
|
|
- Final determination of security compliance without human verification
|
|||
|
|
- Autonomous vulnerability remediation without testing
|
|||
|
|
3. **Legal or medical advice** - The model is not qualified to provide:
|
|||
|
|
- Legal advice regarding security regulations, compliance requirements, or intellectual property disputes
|
|||
|
|
- Legal advice regarding security issues that would reference legal statutes, precedents, or case law necessary to provide legal advice
|
|||
|
|
- Medical advice regarding health impacts of security incidents
|
|||
|
|
4. **Non-security use cases** - The model is specifically optimized for cybersecurity and may not perform as well on general tasks as models trained for broader applications.
|
|||
|
|
5. **Violation of Laws or Regulations** - Any use that violates applicable laws or regulations.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## How to Get Started with the Model
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Use the code below to get started with the model.
|
|||
|
|
[The cookbook](https://github.com/cisco-foundation-ai/cookbook) provides example use cases, code samples for adoption, and references.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
```python
|
|||
|
|
# Import the required libraries
|
|||
|
|
import torch
|
|||
|
|
from transformers import AutoTokenizer, AutoModelForCausalLM
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Load the model and tokenizer
|
|||
|
|
tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("fdtn-ai/Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct")
|
|||
|
|
model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("fdtn-ai/Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct")
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
prompt = "CVE-2015-10011 is a vulnerability about OpenDNS OpenResolve improper log output neutralization. What is the corresponding CWE?"
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
messages = [
|
|||
|
|
{"role": "user", "content": prompt}
|
|||
|
|
]
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
model_inputs = tokenizer.apply_chat_template(messages, tokenize=False, add_generation_prompt=True)
|
|||
|
|
inputs = tokenizer(model_inputs, return_tensors="pt", add_special_tokens=False)
|
|||
|
|
output = model.generate(**inputs, temperature=0.1, max_new_tokens=250)
|
|||
|
|
resp = tokenizer.batch_decode(output)[0]
|
|||
|
|
print(resp.replace(model_inputs, ""))
|
|||
|
|
```
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Training and Evaluation
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Training Data
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct was trained on a wide variety of public and proprietary question answer/pairs for general and security-specific instruction-following.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Data cutoff:** April 10th, 2025.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
A more detailed description of the methodology is available in the technical report.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Training Setup
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct is based on the **Llama 3.1 8B** architecture. Training was performed on Cisco Foundation AI’s internal compute cluster.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Key training details:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **Instruction fine-tuning** to follow human instructions
|
|||
|
|
- **RLHF** to align model answers to human preferences
|
|||
|
|
- **4096-token** sequence length
|
|||
|
|
- **Optimizer:** AdamW
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
A more detailed description of the methodology is available in the technical report.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Evaluation
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct was benchmarked on cybersecurity and general reasoning tasks, using a standardized 0-shot instruction prompting setup (temperature = 0.3).
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| **Benchmark** | **Foundation-sec-8B** | **Llama 3.1 8B** | **GPT-4o-mini** |
|
|||
|
|
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
|||
|
|
| CTI-MCQA | 0.644 | 0.617 | 0.672 |
|
|||
|
|
| CTI-RCM | 0.692 | 0.558 | 0.655 |
|
|||
|
|
| CTI-VSP | 0.802 | 0.815 | 0.792 |
|
|||
|
|
| IF-Eval | 0.811 | 0.791 | 0.834 |
|
|||
|
|
| Alpaca Eval 2 | 35.453 | 24.477 | 52.720 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Benchmark Overview:**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **CTI-MCQA:** 2,500 multiple-choice questions testing cybersecurity knowledge across frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK, NIST, GDPR, and threat intelligence best practices.
|
|||
|
|
- **CTI-RCM:** 1,000 vulnerability root cause mapping examples linking CVEs to CWE categories, assessing deep understanding of security weaknesses.
|
|||
|
|
- **CTI-VSP:** A set of 1,000 CVE descriptions where models predict the CVSS v3 Base metrics and compute the overall score, with performance measured by the average absolute difference from the true scores.
|
|||
|
|
- **IF-Eval:** 541 instruction-following prompts designed for automated, reproducible assessment of LLM instruction-following capabilities.
|
|||
|
|
- **Alpaca Eval 2:** 805 single-turn prompts auto-scored by GPT-4 Turbo against a GPT-4 Turbo reference, validated with 20,000 human preference votes, and closely matching ChatBot Arena results.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Key highlights:**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **+3 to +11 point gains** over Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct across security-specific benchmarks.
|
|||
|
|
- **Exceptional Instruction-Following capabilities** exceeding that of Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct.
|
|||
|
|
- **Competitive against small Frontier Models** such as GPT-4o-mini on instruction-following capabilities and cybersecurity tasks.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
For full benchmark details and evaluation methodology, please refer to the technical report.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Safety Alignment
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Standard best practices were followed to align the model with general safety values.
|
|||
|
|
Despite the alignment, however, safe out-of-the-box performance cannot be guaranteed.
|
|||
|
|
Our evaluations show that while the model can achieve reasonable safety performance out-of-the-box, LlamaGuard provides much better protection against malicious requests.
|
|||
|
|
It is recommended to deploy this model with additional safeguards (such as LlamaGuard) and human oversight.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| Model | HarmBench Performance |
|
|||
|
|
|---|---|
|
|||
|
|
| Llama-3.1-8b-Instruct | 72.43% |
|
|||
|
|
| Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct | 91.98% |
|
|||
|
|
| **LlamaGuard** + Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct | 99.25% |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Limitations
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct has several limitations that users should be aware of:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. **Domain-specific knowledge limitations**:
|
|||
|
|
- Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct may not be familiar with recent vulnerabilities, exploits, or novel attack vectors or security technologies released after its training cutoff date
|
|||
|
|
- Knowledge of specialized or proprietary security systems or tools may be limited
|
|||
|
|
2. **Potential biases**:
|
|||
|
|
- The model may reflect biases present in security literature and documentation
|
|||
|
|
- The model may be trained on known attack patterns and have difficulty recognizing novel attack vectors
|
|||
|
|
- Security practices and recommendations may be biased toward certain technological ecosystems
|
|||
|
|
- Geographic and cultural biases in security approaches may be present
|
|||
|
|
3. **Security risks**:
|
|||
|
|
- The model cannot verify the identity or intentions of users
|
|||
|
|
- Adversarial prompting techniques might potentially bypass safety mechanisms
|
|||
|
|
- The model may unintentionally provide information that could be misused if proper prompting guardrails are not implemented
|
|||
|
|
4. **Contextual blindness:**
|
|||
|
|
- The model may struggle to understand the complex interrelationships between systems, users, and data in order to provide accurate context.
|
|||
|
|
5. **Technical limitations**:
|
|||
|
|
- Performance varies based on how security concepts are described in prompts
|
|||
|
|
- May not fully understand complex, multi-step security scenarios without clear explanation
|
|||
|
|
- Cannot access external systems or actively scan environments
|
|||
|
|
- Cannot independently verify factual accuracy of its outputs
|
|||
|
|
6. **Ethical considerations**:
|
|||
|
|
- Dual-use nature of security knowledge requires careful consideration of appropriate use cases
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
### Recommendations
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
To address the limitations of Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct, we recommend:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. **Human oversight**:
|
|||
|
|
- Always have qualified security professionals review model outputs before implementation
|
|||
|
|
- Use the model as an assistive tool rather than a replacement for expert human judgment
|
|||
|
|
- Implement a human-in-the-loop approach for security-critical applications
|
|||
|
|
2. **System design safeguards**:
|
|||
|
|
- Implement additional validation layers for applications built with this model
|
|||
|
|
- Consider architectural constraints that limit the model's ability to perform potentially harmful actions (excessive agency)
|
|||
|
|
- Deploy the model in environments with appropriate access controls
|
|||
|
|
3. **Prompt engineering**:
|
|||
|
|
- Use carefully designed prompts that encourage ethical security practices
|
|||
|
|
- Include explicit instructions regarding responsible disclosure and ethical hacking principles
|
|||
|
|
- Structure interactions to minimize the risk of inadvertently harmful outputs
|
|||
|
|
4. **Knowledge supplementation**:
|
|||
|
|
- Supplement the model with up-to-date security feeds and databases
|
|||
|
|
- Implement retrieval-augmented generation for current threat intelligence sources
|
|||
|
|
5. **Usage policies**:
|
|||
|
|
- Develop and enforce clear acceptable use policies for applications using this model
|
|||
|
|
- Implement monitoring and auditing for high-risk applications
|
|||
|
|
- Create documentation for end users about the model's limitations
|