Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

SecureNet: A Comparative Study of DeBERTa and Large Language Models for Phishing Detection

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.06663 v1 pith:UEDBLOXI submitted 2024-06-10 cs.CR cs.CLcs.LG

SecureNet: A Comparative Study of DeBERTa and Large Language Models for Phishing Detection

classification cs.CR cs.CLcs.LG
keywords debertaphishingllmsmodelsdatalanguageperformanceapproaches
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Phishing, whether through email, SMS, or malicious websites, poses a major threat to organizations by using social engineering to trick users into revealing sensitive information. It not only compromises company's data security but also incurs significant financial losses. In this paper, we investigate whether the remarkable performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) can be leveraged for particular task like text classification, particularly detecting malicious content and compare its results with state-of-the-art Deberta V3 (DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharing) model. We systematically assess the potential and limitations of both approaches using comprehensive public datasets comprising diverse data sources such as email, HTML, URL, SMS, and synthetic data generation. Additionally, we demonstrate how LLMs can generate convincing phishing emails, making it harder to spot scams and evaluate the performance of both models in this context. Our study delves further into the challenges encountered by DeBERTa V3 during its training phases, fine-tuning methodology and transfer learning processes. Similarly, we examine the challenges associated with LLMs and assess their respective performance. Among our experimental approaches, the transformer-based DeBERTa method emerged as the most effective, achieving a test dataset (HuggingFace phishing dataset) recall (sensitivity) of 95.17% closely followed by GPT-4 providing a recall of 91.04%. We performed additional experiments with other datasets on the trained DeBERTa V3 model and LLMs like GPT 4 and Gemini 1.5. Based on our findings, we provide valuable insights into the effectiveness and robustness of these advanced language models, offering a detailed comparative analysis that can inform future research efforts in strengthening cybersecurity measures for detecting and mitigating phishing threats.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. SoK: Exposing the Generation and Detection Gaps in LLM-Generated Phishing

    cs.CR 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    This SoK paper introduces a nine-stage taxonomy for LLM guardrail breaches in phishing, characterizes evasion and manipulation tactics, and identifies a dynamic-offense versus static-defense asymmetry.