OCR-APT: Reconstructing APT Stories from Audit Logs using Subgraph Anomaly Detection and LLMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) are stealthy cyberattacks that often evade detection in system-level audit logs. Provenance graphs model these logs as connected entities and events, revealing relationships that are missed by linear log representations. Existing systems apply anomaly detection to these graphs but often suffer from high false positive rates and coarse-grained alerts. Their reliance on node attributes like file paths or IPs leads to spurious correlations, reducing detection robustness and reliability. To fully understand an attack's progression and impact, security analysts need systems that can generate accurate, human-like narratives of the entire attack. To address these challenges, we introduce OCR-APT, a system for APT detection and reconstruction of human-like attack stories. OCR-APT uses Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) for subgraph anomaly detection, learning behavior patterns around nodes rather than fragile attributes such as file paths or IPs. This approach leads to a more robust anomaly detection. It then iterates over detected subgraphs using Large Language Models (LLMs) to reconstruct multi-stage attack stories. Each stage is validated before proceeding, reducing hallucinations and ensuring an interpretable final report. Our evaluations on the DARPA TC3, OpTC, and NODLINK datasets show that OCR-APT outperforms state-of-the-art systems in both detection accuracy and alert interpretability. Moreover, OCR-APT reconstructs human-like reports that comprehensively capture the attack story.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".